;  Ritchie. 


THE 


TRIALS  FOE  TREASON 


AT 


INDIANAPOLIS, 


DISCLOSING  THE  PLANS  FOR  ESTABLISHING 


North-Western  Confederacy. 


Being  th.3  Official  Record  of  the  Trials  before  the  Military  Commission  convened  by  Special  Orders  No.  129,  Head- 
Quarters  District  of  Indiana ;  Brevet  Major  General  A.  P.  HOVEY,  Commander  of  the  District.    Brevet 
Brigadier  General  SILAS  COLGROVK,  President;  H.  L.  BURNETT,  of  the  Department  of 

the  Ohio  and  Northern  Department,  Judge  Advocate  of  the  Commission. 

Containing  the  Testimony,  Arguments,  Finding  and  Sentence,  in  the  case  of  HARRISON  H.  DODD  ;  also  of  WILLIAM 
A.  BOWLES,  ANDREW  HUMPHREYS,  HORACE  HEFFREN,  LAMBDIN  P.  MILLIQAN,  and  STEPHEN  HORSRY. 
Developing  the  Origin,  History,  Extent,  Names  of  Officers,  etc.,  of  the  Secret   Orders  of 
Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle,  the  Circle  of  Honor,  the  Order  of  American 
Knights,  and  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty — their  Organization, 
Rituals,  Passwords,  Grips,  Oaths,  Obligations  and  Pen 
alties  ;  their  ostensible  and  real  purposes. 

With  accurate  Illustrations  of  the  Greek  Fire  Shells,  Hand  Grenades,  Rockets  and  Infernal  Machines  of  the  Con 
spirators,  introduced  in  Evidence  on  the  Trials. 

To  which  is  added  the  full  Report  of  Judge  Advocate  General  Holt  on  the  Order  of  American  Knights,  alia*  the 
Sons  of  Liberty ;  a  Western  Conspiracy  in  aid  of  the  Southern  Rebellion. 


EDITED  BY  >^    ,    „     ,. 

BENN  PITMAN;   -^  : 

KBCOBDEB  TO    THE   MlLITABY   COMMISSION 


CINCINNATI: 
MOORE,   WIL  STACK   &  BALDWIN, 

25  WEST  FOURTH  STREET, 
1865. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1865, 

BY  MOORE,  WILSTACH  &  BALDWIN, 
lu  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the  Southern  District  of  Ohio. 


NTRODUCTORY. 


DOUBLE  interest  attaches  itself  to  the  records  contained  in  the  following 
pages :  first,  they  contain  the  exposure  of  a  plot  to  overthrow  the 
National  Government — a  more  perfidious,  and,  perhaps,  more  gigantic 
conspiracy  than  is  found  in  the  annals  of  any  nation;  and,  secondly,  the  fact  and 
incidents  of  its  suppression  by  Martial  law. 

The  Northern  sympathizers  with  the  Southern  Rebellion  sought  to  give  it  aid, 
and  insure  its  success,  by  designs  both  daring  and  malignant ;  and  with  no  other 
purpose  than  to  perpetuate  an  institution  at  once  a  reproach  and  an  outrage  to 
civilization.  These  designs  were  checked,  and  a  great  calamity  averted,  by  the 
strong  arm  of  military  power.  The  chief  criminals  were  seized  by  military 
authority,  and  tried  and  condemned  by  a  military  tribunal. 

For  the  first  time  in  the  history  of  the  world,  this  mighty  power,  heretofore 
but  too  frequently  used  by  kings  and  despots  for  the  purpose  of  aggression,  or 
personal  aggrandizement,  has  been  exercised  in  a  spirit  of  wise  beneficence,  to 
conserve  the  liberty  of  a  great  and  free  people.  But,  it  is  asked,  is  not  this  the 
attainment  of  a  right  by  doing  a  great  wrong?  Such  is  the  argument  of  the 
enemies  of  the  Government. 

Has,  then,  the  military  power  been  unlawfully  exercised?  Has  the  supremacy 
of  the  Constitution  been  questioned,  or  have  its  wise  provisions  been  ignored? 
Has  Liberty — the  priceless  jewel  for  which  the  wisest  and  noblest  have  died — 
been  confided  to  faithless  hands  ?  These  are  among  the  vital  questions  discussed 
and  decided  in  the  able  arguments  'contained  in  this  volume. 

Thanks  to  the  institutions  that  have  so  ordained,  and  to  the  progress  that  has 

prepared   us,  the   People  are  now  the  makers   and  directors  of  this   potent,  and 

3 


IV  INTRODUCTORY. 

necessarily  despotic  arm !  It  is  for  the  people,  then,  to  determine  whether  they 
or  a  faction  shall  rule ;  whether  freedom  shall  continue  to  be  the  privileged 
birthright  of  our  children,  or  whether  an  oligarchy  shall  plot  to  destroy  this  Great 
Republic,  and  erect  a  barbarism  upon  its  ruins.  These  are  questions  upon  which 
every  one  desiring  or  deserving  to  live  under  the  shield  of  a  free  and  great 
nation,  should  satisfy  himself;  and  he  can  not  fail  to  be  instructed,  as  well  as 
deeply  interested,  in  the  developments  contained  in  this  volume. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


Explanation  of  Illustrations 7 

Illustrations 8 

Commission,  Special  Order  for 9 

Jurisdiction  of  the  Commission,  Plea 

to  the 9 

Jurisdiction  of  the  Commission,  Argu 
ments  in  support  of  the  Plea 10 

Judge  Advocate's  Reply  to  Argument 

of  Counsel '12 

Charges    and    Specifications  preferred 

against  H.  H.  DODD 17 

FELIX  G.  STIDGER.  Testimony  of. 19 


GEORGE  E.  PUGH,  " 

JOSEPH  KIRKPATRICK,   "  " 

WILLIAM  CLAYTON,        "  " 

WESLEY  TRANTER,         "  " 

ELLIOTT  ROBERTSON,     "  " 

Affidavit  of  Counsel  on  the  escape  of 

H.  H.  DODD 

Report  of  Colonel  WARNER  on  the  escape 


of  H.  H.  DODD , 

Argument  of  Judge  Advocate,  on  pro 
ceeding  to  findings  and  sentence  in 

absence  of  the  accused 50 

J.  W.  GORDON,  Reply  of. 53 

"        Argument  of,  on  the  Ju 
risdiction  of  the  Commission 55 

M.  M.  RAY,  Argument  of. 64 

Judge  Advocate,  Reply  of. 67 

Commission,  Special  Orders  for 73 

Counsel,  Introduction  of. 74 

Charges  and  Specifications  preferred 
against  WILLIAM  A.  BOWLES,  ANDREW 
HUMPHREYS,  HORACE  HEFFREN,  L.  P. 

MILLIGAN,  and  STEPHEN  HORSEY 74 

Severance,  Motions  for 77 

Judge  Advocate,  Reply  of  on  Severance.     78 
WILLIAM  M.  HARRISON,  Testimony  of.....     80 


Circular  of  the  0.  S.  L.  to  County 
Temples 83 

Letter  of  L.  P.  MILLIGAN  to  General  H. 

H.  DODD 88 

EDWIN  A.  DAVIS,  withdrawal  of  as  Coun 
sel '. 89 

WESLEY  TRANTER,  Testimony  of. 93 

STEPHEN  TENEY,  " 96 

JOSEPH  J.  BINGHAM,        "          " 97 

FELIX  G.  STIDGER,  "          " 106 

THOMAS  R.   COBB,   Introduction  o.f,  as 

Counsel  for  STEPHEN  HORSEY 114 

Colonel  A.  J.  WARNER,  Testimony  of.....  118 
C.  L.  V.  (Vallandjgham),  Letter  from...  119 

ELLIOTT  ROBERTSON,  Testimony  of. 119 

HENRY  L.  ZUMRO,  "          " 120 

HORACE  HEFFREN,  Charges  and  Specifi 
cations  canceled 123 

HORACE  HEFFREN,  Testimony  of. 123 

CYRUS  L.  DUNHAM,  Counsel  for  HEFFREN, 

Statement  of. 128 

Colonel  J.  T.  WILDER,  relieved 137 

JAMES  L.  MASON,  Testimony  of. 141 

HARRISON  CONNELL,       "          " 141 

ELISHA  COWGILL,  "          " 141 

JAMES  B.  WILSON,         "          " 143 

WILLIAM  S.  BUSH,          "          " 150 

Speech  of  L.  P.  MILLIGAN,  Argument  on 

admissibility  of  newspaper  report  of.  151 
Speech  of  L.  P.  MILLIGAN,  loyal  or  dis 
loyal  character  of. 153 

NICHOLAS  COCHRANE,  Testimony  of. 156 

Testimony  on  the  part  of  the  Govern 
ment  closed 157 

WILLIAM  G.  Moss,  Testimony  of. 157 

Argument  on  the  admissibility  of  state 
ments  made  by  the  accused  in  his 
own  favor 157 


VI 


TABLE   OF   CONTENTS. 


Character  for  loyalty,  etc.,  of  A.  HUM 
PHREYS 163 

D.  0.  DAILEY,  Testimony  of. 165 

Rev.  RICHARD  A.  CURREN,  Testimony  of.  166 
Argument   on    admissibility   of    state 
ments  not  expressed  to  any  public 

assembly 166 

JOHN  J.  SCOTTON,  Testimony  of. 169 

WILLIAM  SAYLER,  "          " 169 

GEORGE  BAILEY,  "          " 169 

WILLIAM  ALLEN,  "          " 169 

WILLIAM  WOLF,  "          " 170 

W.  M.  SWASEY,  "          " 170 

GEO.  BAILEY  (recalled)  "          " 170 

WILLIAM  WINES,  "          " 171 

WILLIAM  JOHNSON,        "          " 171 

WILLIAM  C.  KOCHER,     "          " 172 

JOSEPH  JOHNSON,  " 172 

SAMUEL  WINTERS,  "          " 173 

G.  R.  CORLEW,  "          " 176 

SAMUEL  F.  DAY,  "          " 177 

OCHMIG  BIRD,  "          " 177 

B.  F.  IBACH,  "          " 179 

Captain  SAMUEL  PLACE,  "          " 180 

G.R.  CORLEW  (recalled)"          " 180 

MOSES  W.  MILLIGAN,     "          " 180 

EDWARD  PRICE,  "          " 180 

S.  G.  BURTON,  "         '"' 181 

Speech  of  A.  HUMPHREYS,  Argument  on 
the  admissibility  of  what  he  said  as 

to  right  of  secession,  etc 181 

WILLIS  G.  NEFP,  Testimony  of. 185 

JOHN  ROACH,  "          " 186 

WILSON  B.  LOCKRIDGE,  "          " 186 

SAMUEL  MCGAUGHEY,     "          " 187 

CUTTER  S.  DOBBINS,         "          " 187 

HARRISON  CONNELL,        "  " 187 

WILLIAM  N.  BANKET,     "          " 187 

Gen.  ALVIN  P.  HOVEY,  "          " 188 

M.  B.  BRANT,  "          " 188 

W.  J.  SMITH,  "          " 188 

SAMUEL  CHANDLER,         "          " 189 

D.  GARLAND  ROSE,         "          " 189 

EDVARD  HARRISON,       "          " 189 

JOHN  NAVE,  "          " 189 

W.  C.  SMOCK,  "          " 189 

DAVID  STOCKMAN,  "          " 189 


PAGB. 

of.  

189 

« 

190 

a 

190 

u 

191 

a 

191 

a 

191 

a 

191 

a 

191 

a 

.  192 

JACOB   FARLING,  Testimony   of. 
WM.   R.  TAYLOR,           <l 
R.  C.  BOOKING,                " 
WM.  H.  CHAPMAN,          " 
WILLIAM  JOHNSON,         " 
SAMUEL  D.  PRICE,           " 
THURSTON  W.  RITTING,  " 
BORZILLAI  MESSLER,       " 
THOMAS  G.  SMITH,          " 
MRS.  ELIZABETH  T.  SIMONS,  Testimony  of.   192 
Impeaching  of  the  Testimony  of  RICH 
ARD  A.  CURREN,  Argument  on 192 

JONATHAN  W.  GORDON,  Argument  of. 195 

M.  M.  RAY,  "          " 224 

J.  R.  COFFROTH,        "    " 238 

Judge  Advocate  BURNETT,  Reply  of 249 

Explanation  of  Initials  employed  in  the 

Rituals 295 

Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle,  Ritual  of.  297 

Sons  of  Liberty,  First  Degree  (I) 299 

Sons  of  Liberty,  Vestibule  Lesson,  (S.  L. )  302 
Sons  of  Liberty,  First  Degree  (0.  S.  L.)  303 
Sons  of  Liberty,  First  Conclave  or  Sec 
ond  Degree  (I) 306 

Sons   of  Liberty,  Second  Conclave   or 

Third  Degree  (II) 308 

General  Laws  of  the  Order  of  Sons  of 

Liberty 308 

Constitution  of  the  Grand  Council  of 

S.  L.  of  Indiana 311 

Constitution  and  Laws  of  the  Supreme 

Grand  Council 314 

Proceedings  of  the  Grand  Council  State 

of  Indiana 315 

Address  of  the  Grand  Commander  State 

of  Indiana 316 

Resolutions  of  the  Grand  Council  State 

of  Indiana 319 

Report  of  the  Grand  Secretary  State  of 

Indiana 319 

HOLT,  Judge  Advocate  General,  Official 

Report  of. 323 

Letter  from  General  HEINTZELMAN  to 

Major  General  HALLECK 339 

H.  H.  DODD,  Letter  of,  to  the  Cincinnati 

Enquirer 340 


EXPLANATION  OF  THE  ILLUSTRATIONS. 


No.  1  is  a  seemingly  harmless  portmanteau. 

No.  2  exhibits  its  internal  arrangement.  An 
alarm-clock,  with  the  bell  removed,  set  to  any 
given  time,  springs  the  lock  of  a  gun,  the 
hammer  of  which,  striking  and  exploding  a 
cap,  placed  upon  a  tube  filled  with  powder, 
fires  a  train  connected  with  a  bottle  of  Greek 
fire.  The  explosion  of  these  combustibles  ig 
nites  the  tow,  saturated  with  turpentine,  with 
which  the  remainder  of  the  portmanteau  is 
filled. 

No.  3  is  a  conical  shell,  three  and  a  half 
inches  in  diameter. 

Nos.  4  and  5  exhibit  the  same  unscrewed. 

No.  7  is  a  case  to  contain  powder,  with  a 
nipple  for  a  cap  at  its  upper  end.  No.  7  screws 
into  G,  the  space  between  the  two  being  filled 
with  Greek  fire.  Nos.  6  and  7  make  an  inte 
rior  shell,  fitting  loosely  in  No.  3,  and  which,  on 
striking  any  object,  explodes  the  cap  on  the 
top  of  7. 

No.  8  is  a  spherical  shell,  or  hand-grenade. 

Nos.  9  and  10  exhibit  the  same  unscrewed. 

No.  11  is  an  interior  shell,  with  nine  nip 
ples  for  caps,  fitting  loosely,  so  as  to  leave 


space  for  concussion.  No.  11,  also,  is  made  to 
unscrew  in  the  center,  to  hold  No.  12,  a  small 
vial  containing  Greek  fire — the  space  between 
the  two  being  filled  with  powder.  The  drop 
ping  of  this  shell  a  quarter  of  a  yard  from 
the  floor,  invariably  explodes  one  or  more  of 
the  caps.  The  string  attached  to  No.  8  ena 
bles  a  person  to  throw  it  a  greater  distance, 
as  a  sling,  with  less  danger  of  explosion  in 
his  own  hand. 

No.  1§  is  a  letter  in  secret  cipher,  sometimes 
employed  by  the  Order  of  Sons  of  Liberty  in 
their  communication  with  each  other,  upon 
matters  requiring  secrecy. 

"  HEADQUARTERS,  IOTH  DISTRICT,  "I 
Grand  Marshal's  Office.         J 
"Dc.pt.  Marshal: 

"We  have  40  rifles  and  100  pistols  for  your 
township.  It  is  necessary  that  they  are  placed 
in  the  hands  of  our  brothers  immediately. 
Inform  your  company  that  the  arms  will  be 
ready  on  Wednesday  night. 

"Yours, 

"A.  A.  D.  C. 
"F — r-  W." 
7 


APPROVAL  OF  THE  SECRETARY  OF  WAR,  ETC. 


CINCINNATI,  0.,  Nov.  7,  1864. 

Major  IT.  L.  Burnett,  Judge  Advocate  Depart 
ment  of  the  Ohio  and  Northern  Department : 
Messrs.  Moore,  Wilstach  &  Baldwin,  of  this 
city,  will  publish  in  permanent  and  respec 
table  book  shape,  and  I  will  edit,  the  official 
reports  of  the  trial  of  II.  IT.  Dodd,  also  of 
W.  A.  Bowles,  and  others,  adding  thereto 
the  report  of  the  Judge  Advocate  General, 
if  I  can  obtain  your  sanction  and  co-opera 
tion,  and  the  approval  of  the  Military  au 
thorities. 

I  am,  very  respectfully  and  obediently, 
(Signed)  BENN  PITMAN, 

Recorder  to  the  Military  Commission. 


INDORSEMENT  OF  H.  L.  BURNETT,  JUDGE  ADVO 
CATE  DEPARTMENT  OF  THE  OHIO  AND  NORTHERN 
DEPARTMENT. 

JUDGE  ADVOCATE'S  OFFICE,  "\ 

Department  of  the  Ohio  and  Northern  Department,  I 

Cincinnati,  0.,  Nov.  7,  18G4.      J 

Respectfully  referred  to  Brigadier  Gen 
eral  J.  Holt,  Judge  Advocate  General,  U. 
S.  Army. 

The  within  application  of  Mr.  Pitman  re 
ceives  my  approval,  and,  in  the  enterprise 
which  he  proposes  to  undertake,  I  will  give 
him  such  assistance  as  I  am,  from  time  to 
time,  able  to  render.  I  think  the  publica 
tion  of  these  treason  trials  will  be  of  great 


public  service  in  showing  the  people  the 
contemplated  anarchy  and  bloodshed  from 
which  they  have  been  delivered,  and,  as  a 
result,  confirming  them  in  their  patriotic 
resolves  to  support  the  Government  in  its 
efforts  to  maintain  law,  order  and  civiliza 
tion.  It  will  tend  to  unite  the  Northern 
people  more  completely  in  their  support  of 
the  Government  in  its  efforts  to  maintain  the 
integrity  of  the  Republic  as  the  only  means 
of  establishing  a  permanent  peace. 
(Signed)  H.  L.  BURNETT, 

Judge  Advocate  Department  of  the  Ohio 
And  Northern  Department 


INDORSEMENT     OF   BRIGADIER    GENERAL   J.    HOLT, 

JUDGE   ADVOCATE   GENERAL. 
BUREAU  OF  MILITABY  JUSTICK,  Nov.  11, 18G4. 
Approved. 
(Signed)  J.  HOLT, 

Judge  Advocate  General. 


INDORSEMENT   OF  ASSISTANT  SECRETARY  OF  WAR, 
C.   A.    DANA. 
VV'AE  DEPARTMENT,  Nov.  15, 1864. 

Approved. 

By  order  of  the  Secretary  of  War. 

(Signed)  C.  A.  DANA, 

Assistant  Secretary  of  War. 


PROCEEDINGS 


OF  A 


MILITAEY  COMMISSION, 

Which  convened  at  Indianapolis,  Indiana,  by  virtue  of  the  following  Special  Orders, 

to  wit : 


HEADQUARTERS  DISTRICT  or  INDIANA,        1 
Indianapolis,  September  17, 18G4.  J 

Special  Orders  No.  129. 

A  Military  Commission  is  constituted  to 
meet  at  the  United  States  Court  Rooms,  in 
the  city  of  Indianapolis,  on  the  nineteenth 
(19th)  day  of  September,  1864,  at  10  o'clock, 
A.  M.,  or  as  soon  thereafter  as  practicable, 
for  the  trial  of  Harrison  H.  Dodd,  and  such 
other  prisoners  as  may  be  brought  before  it. 

DETAIL   FOR   THE   COMMISSION. 

1.  Brevet  Brigadier    General  Silas  Col- 
grove,  United  States  Volunteers. 

2.  Colonel  William  E.  McLean,  43d  In 
fantry,  Indiana  Volunteers, 

3.  Colonel  John  T.  Wilder,  17th  Infantry, 
Indiana  Volunteers. 

4.  Colonel  Thomas  I.   Lucas,   16th    In 
fantry,  Indiana  Volunteers. 

5.  Colonel  Charles  D.  Murray,  89th  In 
fantry,  Indiana  Volunteers. 

6.  Colonel   Benjamin  Spooner,   83d  In 
fantry,  Indiana  Volunteers. 

7.  Colonel  Richard  P.  DeHart,  128th  In 
fantry,  Indiana  Volunteers. 

Major  Henry  L.  Burnett,  Judge  Advocate 
Department  of  the  Ohio  and  Northern 
Department,  Judge  Advocate. 

The  Commission  will  sit  without  regard 
to  hours. 

By  order  of  Brevet  Major  General  Alvin 
P.  Hovey.  AND.  C.  KEMPER, 

Assistant  Adjutant  General 

HEADQUARTERS  DISTRICT  OF  INDIANA,        \ 
Indianapolis,  September  21,  1804.  J 

Special  Orders  No.  131. 

2.  Colonel  Ambrose  A.  Stevens,  Veteran 
Reserve  Corps,  is  appointed  a  member  of 
the  Military  Commission,  constituted  by 
Special  Order  No.  129,  of  the  17th  of  Sep 
tember,  instant,  from  the£e  Headquarters. 

By  order  of  Brevet  Major  General  Alvin 
P.  Hovey. 

[Signed]  AND.  C.  KEMPER, 

Assistant  Adjutant  General. 


COXTRT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,        ) 
September  22, 1864.  10  o'clock,  A.  M.  / 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  the 
foregoing  orders. 

All  the  members  present.*  Also,  the 
Judge  Advocate. 

The  Commission  then  proceeded  to  the 
trial  of  Harrison  H.  Dodd,  a  citizen  of  In 
diana,  who  was  present  before  the  Commis 
sion,  and  who,  having  heard  read  the  order 
appointing  the  Commission,  also  the  order 
detailing  Colonel  Ambrose  A.  Stevens  as  a 
member,  was  asked  by  the  Judge  Advocate 
if  he  had  any  objection  to  any  member 
named  in  the  orders,  to  which  he  replied, 
"  I  have  none." 

The  members  of  the  Commission  and  the 
Judge  Advocate  were  then  duly  sworn  in 
the  presence  of  the  accused. 

Benn  Pitman  and  W.  S.  Bush  were  duly 
sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  as  Recorders 
to  the  Commission,  also  in  the  presence  of 
the  accused. 

The  accused  applied  to  the  Commission 
to  be  permitted  to  introduce  J.  W.  Gordon, 
Esq.,  and  M!.  M.  Ray,  Esq.,  as  his  counsel, 
which  application  was  granted,  and  they 
appeared  as  counsel  for  the  accused. 

The  accused,  through  his  counsel,  then 
offered  the  following  plea  to  the  jurisdiction 
of  the  Commission: 

The  defendant,  Harrison  H.  Dodd,  pro 
tests  and  objects  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
Commission  appointed  to  try  him  upon  the 
aforesaid  charges  and  specifications  there 
under,  and  claims  the  right,  as  a  citizen  of 
the  United  States,  and  of  the  State  of  In 
diana,  to  have  the  said  charges  and  specifi 
cations  presented  by  a  grand  jury  of  the 


*  If  a  member  of  the  Commission  was,  in  any  case, 
absent  from  sickness,  or  other  unavoidable  cause,  tho 
case  was  proceeded  with,  on  the  consent  of  the  accusud 
being  given  in  open  Court,  and  such  member  took  hia 
seat  again  on  tho  Commission  only  with  the  consent  of 
the  accused  being  given  in  open  Court,  after  having  first 
heard  read  all  the  testimony  taken  during  his  absence. 

9 


10 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


district  wherein  said  several  offenses  are 
alleged  to  have  been  committed,  to  the 
proper  District  Court  thereof;  and  to  be 
tried  by  a  jury  of  the  said  district,  duly 
elected  and  sworn  according  to  the  Consti 
tution  and  laws  of  the  United  States  of 
America.  This  he  claims  as  a  citizen  of  the 
United  States,  and  of  the  State  and  District 
of  Indiana,  and  as  being  in  no  wise  con 
nected  with  the  army  or  navy  of  the  United 
States,  as  a  member  thereof,  or  as  attached 
thereto. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

HARRISON  H.  DODD. 

The  Commission  adjourned,  to  meet  on 
Friday,  September  23,  at  10  o'clock,  A.  M. 

COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         "j 
September  23,  1864,  10  o'clock,  A.  M.  J 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  ad 
journment. 

All  the  members  present.  Also,  the 
Judge  Advocate,  the  accused,  and  his  coun 
sel.  ' 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

The  accused,  through  his  counsel,  sub 
mitted  the  following  brief  in  support  of  his 
plea  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Commission: 

Mr.  President  and  Gentlemen  of  the  Commission: 

In  support  of  his  objection  to  the  juris 
diction  of  the  Commission  to  try  him  upon 
the  charges  preferred  against  him,  the  de 
fendant  respectfully  submits  the  following 
considerations: 

I.  These  charges  involve  capital  and  infa 
mous  crimes,  and  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States  expressly  provides  that  "no 
person  shall  be  held  to  answer  for  a  capital 
or  otherwise  infamous  crime,  unless  on  a 
presentment  or  indictment  by  a  grand  jury, 
except  in  cases  arising  in  the  land  or  naval 
forces,  or  in  the  militia,  when  in  actual 
service  in  time  of  war  or  public  danger." 
(Amend.  Const.  Art.  5.)  And  again:  "In  all 
criminal  cases  the  prisoner  shall  enjoy  the 
right  of  a  speedy  and  public  trial,  by  an  im 
partial  jury  of  the  State  and  district  where 
the  crime  shall  have  been  committed,"  etc. 
(Amend.  Const.  Art.  6.) 

These  provisions  were  adopted  after  the 
organization  of  the  Government  of  the 
United  States  under  the  Constitution,  and 
for  the  purpose  of  placing  the  trial  by  jury 
entirely  beyond  the  power  of  Congress,  and 
of  all  other  branches  of  the  Government. 
The  Constitution,  as  originally  adopted, 
contained  'the  following  provision  on  the 
subject:  "The  trial  of  all  crimes,  except  in 
cases  of  impeachments,  shall  be  by  jury; 
;ind  such  trial  shall  be  held  in  the  State 
where  such  crime  shall  have  been  commit 
ted."  (Article  4,  section  2.)  So  jealous  were 
the  people  of  the  right  in  question,  that 
they  required  the  amendment  quoted,  not 
withstanding  the  original  provision. 

The  defendant  is  a  citizen  of  the  United 


States,  and  of  the  State  of  Indiana,  not  in 
the  land  or  naval  forces,  or  in  the  militia 
in  actual  service.  He  is,  therefore,  not 
within  the  exception  of  Article  5  of  amend 
ments  above  cited.  That  exception  does 
not  affect  his  right  any  more  than  if  it  did 
not  exist.  These  several  provisions  of  the 
Constitution  are  absolute  as  to  him;  and  if 
any  constitutional  provision  can  protect  a 
right,  it  would  seem  that  he  ought  to  be 
protected  from  a  trial  not  in  conformity 
with  them.  It  seems  that  he  can  not,  in 
fairness,  be  tried  without  first  being  pre 
sented  by  a  grand  jury;  or  tried  without  a 
petit  jury  of  the  district  wherein  his  al 
leged  offenses  were  committed. 

II.  But  it  may  be  saicl  that  we  are  in  a  state 
of  war;  that  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  is  sus 
pended;  and  the  provisions  in  question  are 
under  similar  suspension.  But  there  is  110 
provision  for  the  suspension  of  any  branch 
of  the  Constitution.  The  Constitution,  in 
deed,  authorizes  the  suspension  of  the  ha 
beas  corpus  act — a  law  of  the  land,  generally 
adopted  in  the  States  prior  to  the  adoption 
of  the  Constitution.  The  right  of  trial  by 
jury,  however,  is  placed  on  a  different  and 
higher  ground.  It  is  secured  by  these  sev 
eral  o.bsolute  provisions  of  the  Constitution, 
against  all  chances,  and  under  all  circum 
stances.  The  fiat  that  suspends  it  must  be 
potent  enough  to  abolish  every  principle  of 
the  Constitution,  and  all  those  primordial 
rights  that  existed  before  the  Constitution, 
and  so  far  as  human  foresight  could  provide 
against  their  invasion,  protected  by  plain 
constitutional  provisions. 

If  it  should  be  contended,  then,  that  the 
power  necessary  for  the  suspension  of  the 
habeas  corpus  involves  in  its  exercise  the  sus 
pension  of  the  right  of  trial  by  jury,  he 
begs  leave  to  say  that,  in  his  opinion,  it  can 
not  for  the  following  reasons: 

1.  The  trial  by  jury  is  placed  by  the  Con 
stitution  among  the  original  reserved  rights 
of  the  people,  and  must,  in  favor  of  natural 
liberty,  be  held  safe  as  against  the  exercise 
of  any  doubtful  power,  upon  the  principle 
of    construction    applied   to    constitutions, 
that  grants  of  power  are  to  be   construed 
strictly  as  against  the  power,  and  in  favor 
of  liberty. 

2.  But,  being  last   in  point  of  time,  and 
of  equal  authority  with  the  provision  in  re 
lation   to   the  suspensions  of  habeas  corpus, 
the  amendments  must  be  held  to  restrain 
that  provision  so  far  as  may  be  necessary  to 
the  perfect  enjoyment  of  the  rights  asserted 
in  the  amendments. 

3.  Simply,   however,   because    they    are 
amendments    to    the    Constitution,    every 
thing   contained   in   that  instrument  that 
may,  in  any  view,  be  held  to  impair  rights 
therein   asserted,  must   give  way  to  them. 
To  that  extent  they  change  and  modify  the 
powers   conferred   on   the  Government,  in 
the  original  instrument.     The  right  of  trial 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


11 


by  jury  in  the  cases  referred  to,  can  not  be 
impaired,  much  less  taken  away,  by  a  sus 
pension  of  the  habeas  corpus,  nor,  indeed,  by 
any  order  of  the  Executive,  or  law  of  Con 
gress.  To  this  effect  see  2d  Story  on  Const, 
section  1778  to  1795,  inclusive. 

III.  But  not  only  may  this  right  of  trial 
by  jury  be  regarded  as  affirmatively  assert 
ed,  and  secured  to  the  citizen,  by,  the  pro 
visions  of  the  Constitution,  but  any  and 
every  other  mode  of  trial  must  be  taken 
to  be  excluded  and  prohibited.  Thus:  "No 
person  shall  be  held  to  answer  for  any  cap 
ital  or  otherwise  infamous  crime,  unless  in 
case  of  presentment  and  indictment  by 
grand  jury,"  etc.,  clearly  precludes  the  no 
tion  of  any  other  form  of  trial.  The  old 
common  law,  and  great  statutes  of  England, 
brought  over  with  them  by  the  founders  of 
the  English  colonies,  and  in  force  at  the 
time  of  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States,  excluded  all  other  modes 
of  trial  of  any  citizen,  not  in  the  military 
service,  and  expressly  that  by  military  com 
mission.  Mr.  Justice  Story,  as  already  cited, 
expressly  appeals  to  and  quotes  Magna 
Charta  upon  this  point,  and  in  support  of 
this  position.  The  39th  chapter  of  that 
great  act  is  as  follows:  "No  freeman  shall 
be  taken  or  imprisoned,  or  disseized,  or 
outlawed,  or  banished,  or  in  any  way  de 
stroyed;  nor  will  we  pass  upon  him,  unless 
by  the  lawful  judgment  of  his  peers,  or  by 
the  law  of  the  land."  "The  judgment  of 
his  peers,  here  alluded  to,"  says  Story,  "is 
the  trial  by  jury,  who  are  called  the  peers 
of  the  party  accused,  being  of  the  like  con 
dition,  and  equal.*  He  also  expressly  says: 
"  When  our  more  immediate  ancestors  re 
moved  to  America,  they  brought  this  great 
privilege  with  them,  as  their  birthright  and 
inheritance,  as  a  part  of  that  admirable 
common,  law,  which  had  fenced  round  and 
interposed  barriers  on  every  side  against 
the  approaches  of  arbitrary  power."  (Sec 
tion  1779.)  But  this  denial  of  any  other 
form  of  trial,  and  especially  that  by  mili 
tary  commission,  was  asserted  in  the  "  Pe 
tition  of  Right,"  passed  in  the  third  year  of 
Charles  I.  It  is  therein  enacted  and  estab 
lished,  "  that  no  man,  of  what  estate  or  con 
dition  that  he  be,  should  be  put  out  of  his 
land  or  tenement,  nor  taken,  nor  imprisoned, 
nor  disherited,  nor  put  to  death,  without 
due  process  of  law;"  and  in  speaking  of  the 
commissions  aforesaid,  the  act  employs  the 
following  terms:  "Which  commissions,  and 
all  others  of  like  nature,  are  wholly  and 
directly  contrary  to  the  said  laws  and  stat 
utes  of  the  realm."  Similar  language  was 
employed  in  the  Bill  of  Rights,  passed  at 
the  time  of  the  revolution  of  1688,  and  it 
may  safely  be  stated  that  since  that  time 
no  proceeding  of  this  nature  has  taken 
place  in  England,  against  any  person  not  a 
member  of  the  army  or  navy,  or  in  the  mili 
tia  in  actual  service.  Indeed,  a  distinguished 


English  Judge  has  said  that  "martial 
law,  as  of  old,  does  not  exist  in  England  at 
all,"  and  is  contrary  to  the  Constitution, 
and  has  been  for  a  century  exploded. 
(Grant  vs.  Gould,  2  H.  BL,  69;  1  Hale  P.  C., 
364;  Hale  Com.  Law  C.,  2,  36.)  This,  it  has 
been  remarked  by  a  learned  Judge,  "is  cor 
rect  as  to  the  community,  both  in  war  and 
peace." 

IV.  By  an  act  of  Congress,  approved  July 
31,  1864  (  Vol.  12,  Statutes  at  large,  J9.2184),  con 
spiracies  are  defined,  and  the  mode  of  pun 
ishment  prescribed,  namely,  by  trial  in  the 
Circuit  or  District  Courts  of  the  United 
States,  of  the  proper  circuit  or  district.  Can 
these  parties  be  tried  before  any  other  tri 
bunal?  The  defendant  holds  not.  By  the 
President's  proclamation  of  September  24, 
1862,  suspending  the  privilege  of  the  writ 
of  habeas  corpus,  it  was  ordered,  "  That  dur 
ing  the  existing  insurrection,  and  as  a 
necessary  measure  for  suppressing  the  same, 
all  rebels  and  insurgents,  their  aiders  and 
abettors,  within  the  United  States,  shall  be 
subject  to  martial  law,  and  liable  to  trial 
and  punishment  by  court-martial  or  mili 
tary  commission."  Without  stopping  to 
inquire  whether  this  proclamation  was  au 
thorized,  and  if  so,  whether  it  embraced 
persons  charged  with  committing  a  substan 
tive  offense,  within  a  State  not  in  insurrec 
tion,  and  where  the  United  States  Courts 
were  in  the  full  exercise  of  their  powers, 
the  defendant  claims  that  it  has  been  su 
perseded  by  the  act  of  Congress  of  the  3d 
of  March,  1863  (  Vol.  12,  Statutes  at  large,  755), 
relating  to  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  and  the 
President's  proclamation  based  thereon,  of 
September  15,  1863.  The  first  section  of 
the  act  of  1863,  authorizes  the  President  to 
suspend  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus.  The  sec 
ond  requires  the  Secretaries  of  State  and 
War  to  report  to  the  Judges  of  the  United 
States  Circuit  and  District  Courts  the  names 
of  all  persons  held  in  military  custody,  by 
order  of  the  President,  in  their  respective 
districts,  and  if  the  grand  juries  of  the 
proper  districts  fail  to  find  bills,  it  is  made 
the  duty  of  the  Judges  to  have  all  such 
persons  discharged  on  taking  the  oath  of 
allegiance  and  giving  bond,  if  required.  The 
third  section  provides  that  all  persons  so 
held  and  not  reported,  shall  be  entitled  to 
a  discharge  in  the  same  manner  as  is 
provided  in  the  second  section,  after  a  fail 
ure  on  the  part  of  the  proper  grand  jury  to 
indict  them.  Here  are  all  the  sections  of 
this  act  which  bear  on  the  question,  and  it 
will  be  seen  that  while  they  contemplate' 
and  sanction  military  arrests,  they  do  not 
countenance  or  authorize  military  trials. 
On  the  contrary,  they  fairly  discountenance 
them. 

The  President's  proclamation,  based  on 
this  act,  limits  the  suspension  of  habeas  cor 
pus  to  persons  amenable  to  military  law,  or 
to  the  rules  and  articles  of  war.  No  order 


12 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


is  contained  in  the  proclamation  in  regard 
to  trial,  and  the  inference  is  irresistible  that 


the 


prop 


er  courts  are  left  to  act  under  the 


rules  of  law  upon  that  subject,  and  these 
are  too  well  defined  to  require  comment. 
Civil  courts  try  offenses  against  the  law 
committed  by  citizens — military  courts  and 
commissions  try  such  as  are  subject  to 
the  rules  and  articles  of  war,  and  the  de 
fendant  claims  that  he  does  not  fall  within 


ordinary  process  of  law  from  hindering  this 
measure,  and  from  giving  aid  and  comfort 
in  various  ways  to  the  insurrection;  now, 
therefore,  be  it  ordered, 

First.  That  during  the  existing  insurrec 
tion,  and  as  a  necessary  measure  for  sup 
pressing  the  same,  all  rebels  and  insurgents, 
their  aiders  and  abettors,  within  the  United 
States,  and  all  persons  discouraging  volun 
teer  enlistments,  resisting  militia  drafts,  or 


that  class.  guilty  of  any  disloyal  practice,  affording  aid 

V.  The  recent  act,  giving  military  courts  |  and  comfort  to  rebels  against  the  authority 
jurisdiction  of  offenses  against  the  civil! of  the  United  States,  shall  be  subject  to 
laws  when  committed  by  soldiers,  excludes !  martial-law,  and  liable  to  trial  and  punish- 


citizens,  by  its  silence,  from  any  such  pro 
vision,  and  leaves  them  to  be  tried  by  the 


(Revised 


civil  courts,  for  all  such  offenses. 
Reg.,  1863,  p.  544.) 

VI.  The  defendant  further  desires  the 
Commission  to  consider  this  question,  in 
determining  that  of  jurisdiction,  namely: 
Can  the  sentence  of  the  Commission  be 
pleaded  in  bar  to  a  prosecution  upon  in 
dictment  for  the  offenses  charged  in  the 
civil  courts?  It  would  seem  not,  in  view  of 
the  recent  legislation  of  Congress  already 
cited.  That  legislation  clearly  gives  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  case  to  the  civil  courts, 
and  upon  the  failure  to  try  or  convict  him, 
entitles  him  to  be  discharged,  either  upon 
terms,  or  absolutely. 

In  view  of  these  considerations,  the  de 
fendant  respectfully  submits  that  he  is  not 
triable  by  this  Commission,  not  being  within 
the  jurisdiction  thereof,  or  of  any  other 
military  tribunal  whatever. 

All  of  which  is  respectfully  submitted, 
HARRISON  H.  DODD. 

JUDGE  ADVOCATE'S  ANSWER. 

The  Judge  Advocate,  Major  Burnett,  then 
made  the  following  reply  : 

To  support  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Com 
mission  appointed  to  try  this  case,  I  submit: 

1.  The  proclamation  of  the  President  of 
the   United   States,    published   in   General 
Orders  No.  141,  dated  September  25,  1862. 

2.  The  general  principles  of  the  laws  of 
nations,  and  the  laws  and  customs  of  war — 
the  military  lex  non  scripta  of  every  land. 

The  proclamation  of  the  President  is  as 
follows: 

WAR  DEPARTMENT,  ADJUTANT  GENERAL'S  OFFICE,  \ 
Washington.  September  25,  1864.     J 

General  Orders  No.  141. 

The  following  proclamation  by  the  Presi 
dent  is  published  for  the  information  and 
government  of  the  army,  and  all  concerned: 

BT    THE    PRESIDENT   OF   THE    UNITED    STATES    OF   AMERICA— 
A   PROCLAMATION. 

WHEREAS,  It  has  become  necessary  to  call 
into  service  not  only  volunteers,  but  also 
portions  of  the  militia  of  the  States  by  draft, 
in  order  to  suppress  the  insurrection  exist 
ing  in  the  United  States,  and  disloyal  per 
sons  are  not  adequately  restrained  by  the 


ment  by  courts-martial  or  military  commis 
sion. 

Second.  That  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  is 
suspended  in  respect  to  all  persons  arrested, 
or  who  are  now  or  hereafter  during  the  re 
bellion  shall  be  imprisoned  in  any  fort, 
camp,  arsenal,  military  prison  or  other  place 
of  confinement,  by  any  military  authority, 
or  by  the  sentence  of  any  court-martial  or 
military  commission. 

In  witness  whereof,  I  have  hereunto  set 
my  hand,  and  caused  the  seal  of  the  United 
States  to  be  affixed. 

Done  at  the  city  of  "Washington,  this, 
twenty-fourth  day  of  September,  in  the  year 
of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred 
and  sixty-two,  and  of  the  independence  of 
the  United  States  the  eighty-seventh. 

ABRAHAM  LINCOLN. 

By  the  President? 

WILLIAM  H.  SEWARD,  Secretary  of  State. 

By  order  of  the  Secretary  of  War: 

L.  THOMAS,  Adjutant  General. 

In  determining  the  edition  of  the  Com 
mission,  this  is  sufficient,  but  in  support  of 
the  position  held,  I  submit: 

That  it  is  an  admitted  principle  in  ethics, 
that  self-preservation  is  the  first  law  of  na 
ture;  that  self-preservation,  or  self-defense, 
is  the  right  of  every  unity  or  community. 
This  nation  is  engaged  in  suppressing  a 
gigantic  rebellion,  to  which  end  it  has 
brought  into  the  field  a  vast  army.  Every 
fiber  of  this  great  nation  is  quivering  in  its 
effort  to  sustain  this  army  in  its  present  vast 
proportions.  That  army  being  organized 
and  put  into  the  field,  becomes  a  living, 
sentient,  and,  to  a  certain  extent,  independ 
ent  body.  A  blow  is  sought  to  be  struck  at 
that  body — at  that  great  army  of  the  Re 
public — to  sever  it,  and  render  it  power 
less — a  blow  all  the  more  mischievous  and 
malignant,  because  it  is  covert  and  con 
cealed.  To  preserve  itself,  to  maintain  its 
integrity  when  it  finds  itself  thus  secretly 
attacked,  it  does  not  wholly  fall  back  on 
its  Government  to  protect  it,  but  it  protects 
itself  by  seizing  the  antagonistic  force.  It 
is  one  of  the  innate  principles  of  every  ex 
isting  thing,  that  it  is  endowed  with  the 
right  to  meet  and  overcome  the  force  that 
seeks  to  destroy  it.  Here,  then,  is  a  power 
being  organized — it  is  true,  in  a  loyal  State, 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


13 


but  with  the  purpose  of  moving  into  a  semi- 
disloyal  State,  a  portion  of  which  is  occu 
pied  and  held  by  forces  seeking  to  destroy 
this  army,  and  with  the  intent  to  co-operate 
with  those  forces  to  render  powerless  our 
army,  and,  if  possible,  to  destroy  it  and  the 
Government.  This  army,  therefore,  with 
out  waiting  for  its  Government  to  move, 
through  the  slow  machinery  of  civil  law, 
against  this  military  force  that  is  being  ar 
rayed  against  it,  seizes  it,  and  says  to  it, 
"  You  are  not  meeting  us  in  open  battle, 
but  you  steal  upon  us  in  the  night  time,  and 
attempt,  assassin-like,  to  stab  us  in  the  back 
while  we  are  facing  the  common  enemy  in 
the  front.  You  are  not  fighting  us  accord 
ing  to  the  recognized  military  law  of  na 
tions,  but  by  the  secret  arts  of  the  assassin. 
We.  therefore,  wheel  upon  you,  and  grapple 
you,  from  an  instinct  of  self-preservation." 
It  is  as  though  a  stealthy  foe  should  creep 
into  a  camp  or  garrison  at  night,  and  seek 
to  ignite  the  magazine,  and  destroy  the  lives 
of  the  entire  garrison.  If  caught,  would 
that  garrison  hesitate  to  convene  a  court, 
and  try  the  offender  as  a  secret,  military 
assassin?  In  like  manner,  when  foes,  cun 
ningly  avoiding  all  show  of  open  hostility, 
secretly  arm  themselves,  not  as  enemies 

Earticularly  of  the  General  Government, 
ut  as  enemies  of  the  military  power  of  the 
Government,  the  military  laws  of  the  land 
give  power  to  seize  the  persons  of  these 
secret  foes,  and  hold  them  responsible  for 
their  acts  to  the  common  law  military. 

Take  the  case  in  hand,  as  it  is  claimed  to 
be,  that  there  wajkan  organized,  formidable 
conspiracy,  military  in  its  character,  and 
created  and  held  in  existence  for  the  pur 
pose  of  aiding  the  enemies  of  the.  country 
and  destroying  the  armies  of  the  nation, 
numbering  in  the  States  of  Ohio,  Indiana 
and  Illinois,  as  claimed  by  its  leaders,  one 
hundred  thousand  men,  the  avowed  pur 
pose  of  these  conspirators  being  to  release 
the  rebel  prisoners  held  in  those  States, 
numbering  between  forty  and  fifty  thousand 
veteran  soldiers,  arm  them  with  guns'  to  be 
seized  from  the  arsenals  of  these  States,  and 
then  to  move  into  Kentucky,  seizing  all  the 
large  cities  by  the  way,  take  possession  of 
the  Louisville  and  Nashville  road,  and,  in 
trenching  at  Nashville  or  Chattanooga,  cut 
General  Sherman's  communications,  thereby 
placing  him  between  two  large  armies,  sev 
ering  him  from  his  base  of  supplies,  and 
thus  effectually,  as  they  thought,  destroying 
this  great  South-western  wing  of  our  army — 
this  right  arm  of  the  Republic — thereby 
giving  to  the  rebels  the  power  to  dictate  to 
the  United  States  terms  of  peace  and  sepa 
ration.  It  was  a  far-reaching,  villainous 
scheme,  and  had  in  it  many  of  the  elements 
of  success.  The  Government  stood  on  the 
brink  of  a  precipice.  But  the  conspirators 
were  foiled  by  the  military  power  of  the 
Government.  Will  it  be  said  that  when  the 


military  authorities  discovered  this  plot, 
they  should  have  waited  for  affidavits,  for 
an  arrest  and  hearing  before  a  United  States 
Commissioner;  and  then  have  released  these 
conspirators  upon  bail,  permitting  them  to 
again  take  the  lead  of  their  hosts  to  work 
out  their  schemes  of  treason  against  the 
Government?  Such  a  course  might  have 
involved  the  destruction  of  the  nation. 
Self-preservation  demanded  that  these  men 
should  be  seized  by  the  military  power. 
Foreseeing  this  danger,  martial  law  had 
been  declared  by  the  President,  and  mili 
tary  courts  given  jurisdiction. 

In  support  of  the  powers  of  the  Govern 
ment,  in  cases  of  insurrection,  or  in  case  of 
great  public  .danger,  to  suspend  the  opera 
tions  of  the  civil  law,  I  cite  the  opinion  of 
Chief  Justice  Taney,  in  a  case  before  the 
Supreme  Court,  where  the  Government  of 
the  State  had  declared  martial  law  in  Rhode 
Island.  In  rendering  an  opinion  on  that 
case,  he  says:  "Unquestionably  a  State  may 
use  its  military  power  to  put  down  an  insur 
rection  too  strong  to  be  controlled  by  the 
civil  authority.  The  power  is  essential  to 
the  existence  of  every  government — essen 
tial  to  the  preservation  of  order  and  free 
institutions,  and  is  as  necessary  to  the  States 
of  this  Union  as  to  any  other  government. 
*•  •*  •*  Without  power  to  do  this,"  he 
again  says,  "martial  law  and  the  military 
array  of  the  Government  would  be  mere 
parade,  and  rather  encourage  attack  than 
repel  it." 

Justice  Woodbury,  dissenting,  said  that 
"a  State  could  not  declare  martial  law,  inas 
much  as  the  war  power,  of  which  it  forms  a 
part,  was  lodged  exclusively  in  the  General 
Government."  Certainly  no  one  will  deny 
that  if  the. Government  of  a  State  can  de 
clare  martial  law  for  suppressing  an  insur 
rection  within  thatState,  with  much  stronger 
reason  can  the  General  Government,  when 
an  insurrection  exists  against  it,  declare  and 
enforce  martial  law,  either  in  part  or  in 
whole. 

The  main  question  raised  by  the  defense 
in  their  argument,  is,  whether  the  legisla 
tive  branch  of  this  Government,  or  the 
President,  has  the  power  of  suspending  the 
writ  of  habeas  corpus,  and  declaring  martial 
law  throughout  the  land.  In  reply  to  the 
argument  of  the  counsel  for  the  accused,  I 
propose  to  cite  a  few  quotations  applicable 
to  this  case: 

Martial  law  is  the  suspension,  for  the  time 
being,  of  all  constitutions  and  civil  laws, 
the  closing  of  common  law  courts,  and  the 
forcible  inauguration  of  a  new,  temporary, 
arbitrary  system  of  administering  justice; 
and  is  only  to  be  justified  by  the  over 
whelming  necessities  of  the  case. 

I  propose, first,  to  examine  English  author 
ities  upon  this  subject;  and  then  refer  to 
American  jurisprudence  as  to  the  right  to 
proclaim  martial  law. 


14 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


It  may  be  premised  that  martial  law  in 
England  as  completely  violates  and  sus 
pends  the  Magna  Charta  as  in  this  country 
it  does  our  own  Constitution. 

Section  39  provides:  "No  freeman  shall 
be  taken  or  imprisoned,  or  disseized,  or  out 
lawed,  or  banished,  or  in  any  way  destroyed; 
nor  will  we  pass  upon  him,  unless  by  the 
lawful  judgment  of  his  peers,  or  by  the  law 
of  the  land." 

The  Mutiny  Act  of  1689,  which  has  been 


re-enacted    at  every 
for  more   than   one 


session  of  Parliament 
hundred  and  seventy 


years,  contains  the  following  declaration: 

"  Whereas,  no  man  may  be  forejudged  of 
life  or  limb,  or  subjected  to  any  kind  of 
judgment  by  martial  law,  or  in  any  other 
manner  than  by  the  judgment  of  his  peers, 
and  according  to  the  known  and  established 
laws  of  this  realm,"  etc. 

It  is  impossible  to  conceive  of  any  doc 
trine  more  irradically  graven  upon  the  Con 
stitution  and  civil  polity  of  England,  than 
this  right  of  habeas  corpus,  and  exemption 
of  the  subject  from  the  operation  of  mar- 


But   notwithstanding   this  clear 


tial 

provision  of  the  Magna  Charta,  as  often  as 
it  is  necessary,  martial  law  is  proclaimed. 
In  the  riots  of  1780,  after  the  mob  had  in 
sulted  a  majority  of  Parliament,  and  the 
residence  of  the  Chief  Justice,  the  King  in 
council  issued  his  proclamation : 

"  We  have,  therefore,  issued  the  most  di 
rect  and  effectual  orders  to  all  our  officers, 
by  an  immediate  exertion  of  their  utmost 
force,  to  suppress  the  same." 

After  which  the  Adjutant  General  issued 
orders  to  the  army  as  follows : 

"In  obedience  to  an  order  of  the  King  in 
council,  the  military  are  to  act  without 
awaiting  the  direction  of  the  civil  magis 
trate,  and  to  use  force  for  dispersing  the 
illegal  and  tumultuous  assemblies  of  the 
people." 

In  subsequent  debates  in  Parliament,  the 
conduct  of  the  King  was  approved.  Lord 
Mansfield  and  Lord  Thurlow  claimed  that  it 
was  not  a  prerogative  of  the  King  to  de 
clare  martial  law,  or  to  use  the  military  to 
suppress  riots ;  but  they  defended  the  act 
on  the  ground  of  necessity. 

During  the  Irish  rebellion  in  1798,  Lord 
Camclen,  Lord  Lieutenant  of  Ireland,  pro 
claimed  martial  law,  which  existed  a  year 
without  any  legislative  action,  and  after 
that  the  Irish  Parliament  sanctioned  the 
act.  In  1801,  after  the  union,  this  subject 
was  discussed,  and  a  bill  was  introduced  to 
continue  martial  law  in  Ireland.  In  this 
debate,  both  those  who  approved,  and  those 
who  opposed  the  bill,  conceded  the  right  of 


the    Executive    Government 

martial  law  when  necessary. 

Sheridan,  opposing  the  bill,  said: 
"In   case   of   rebellion    or  invasion, 


to    proclaim 


His 


Majesty  has,  by  virtue  of  his  prerogative,  a 
right  to  martial  law." 


Lord  Castlereagh,  in  defense  of  the  bill, 
said: 

"I  perfectly  understand  that  the  prerog 
ative  of  the  crown  authorizes  those  acting 
under  its  authority  to  exercise  martial  law. 
I  maintain  that  it  is  a  constitutional  mode 
for  the  Executive  Government  to  exercise 
martial  law  in  the  first  instance,  and  to 
come  to  Parliament  for  indemnity  after 
ward,  and  is  preferable  to  applying  to  Par 
liament  first.  *  *  * 

"The  only  circumstance  in  mind  is 
whether,  if  the  necessity  exists,  this  is  the 
proper  remedy?  If  it  be  so,  we  ought  not 
to  take  alarm  at  a  departure  from  princi 
ple,  which  is  necessary  for  the  preservation 
of  the  Constitution  itself." 

Sir  L.  Parsons,  opposing  the  bill,  said  : 

"  He  thought  the  measure  unnecessary. 
The  Executive  Government  could  resort  to 
martial  law,  if  it  was  necessary  to  suppress 
rebellion." 

Mr.  Gray,  who  also  opposed  it,  said: 

"It  was  better  that  the  Executive  Gov 
ernment  should  resort  to  what  has  been 
called  (he  thought,  not  legally)  its  preroga 
tive  of  proclaiming  martial  law.  That  was 
no  prerogative  of  the  crown,  but  rather  an 
act  of  power  sanctioned  by  necessity,  mar 
tial  law  being  a  suspension  of  the  King's 
peace.  But  it  was  better  that  martial  law 
should  proceed  from  the  Executive  Govern 
ment  in  urgent  moments,  than  to  be  the 
work  of  the  Legislature,  on  every  slight  pre 
tense." 

In  the  rebellion  in  Ceylon,  in  1848,  the 
Governor  proclaimed  martial  law,  and  tried 
and  executed  many  rebtls.  His  conduct 
was  severely  criticised  in  England,  upon  the 
ground  that  it  was  unnecessary;  and  in  an 
able  review  in  the  Quarterly,  volume  83,  page 
127,  it  is  said : 

"We  shall  define  martial  law  to  be  the 
law  of  necessity,  or  defense.  The  right 
which  a  Governor  of  a  colony  has  to  pro 
claim  martial  law  over  subjects,  may  be  said 
to  bear  a  close  analogy  to  the  right  which 
an  individual,  in  absence  of  legal  protec 
tion,  has  to  slay  an  assailant.  In.  both 
cases,  the  evil  must  be  grave.  In  both 
cases,  all  regular  means  of  defense  must  be 
exhausted,  or  beyond  reach,  before  the  ag 
grieved  party  resorts  to  extremities.  In 
both  cases,  the  burthen  of  proof  lies  on  liim 
who  has  ventured  on  such  an  expedient, 
and,  if  he  fails  to  vindicate  himself,  he  is 
liable  to  severe  punishment." 

Hallem  1,  Const.  Hist.,  p.  240,  says: 

"  There  may,  indeed,  be  times  of  pressing 
danger,  when  the  conservation  of  all  de 
mands  a  sacrifice  of  the  legal  rights  of  a 
few;  there  may  be  circumstances  that  not 
only  justify,  but  compel  the  temporary 
abandonment  of  constitutional  forms.  It 
lias  been  usual  for  all  governments,  dur 
ing  an  actual  rebellion,  to  proclaim  martial 
law,  or  the  suspension  of  civil  jurisdiction. 


TREASON   TRIALS  AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


15 


And  this  anomaly,  I  must  admit,  is  very  far  i 
from  being  less  indispensable  at  such  un-( 
happy  seasons,  in  countries  where  the  ordi-  j 
nary  mode  of  trial  is  by  jury,  than  where } 
the  right  of  decision  rests  in  the  Judge." 

Coming  now  to  our  own  country,  the  same 
doctrine  is  laid  down  even  more  explicitly, 
and  by  higher  sanctions  than  in  England. 
In  the  debate  in  Congress  upon  the  subject 
of  martial  law  proclaimed  by  General  Jack 
son  in  New  Orleans,  Robert  J.  Walker,  in 
the  Senate,  submitted  a  report  upon  this 
subject,  in  which  he  said: 

"  The  law  which  justified  this  act,  was  the  I 
great  law  of  necessity;  it  was  the  law  of 
self-defense.  This  great  law  of  necessity — 
of  defense  of  self,  of  home,  and  of  coun 
try — never  was  designed  to  be  abrogated  by 
any  statute,  or  by  any  constitution." 

Mr.  Payne,  of  Alabama,  also  speaking 
upon  this  subject,  said: 

"  I  shall  not  contend  that  the  Constitution 
or  laws  of  the  United  States,  authorize  the 
declaration  of-  martial  law  by  any  authority 
whatever ;  on  the  contrary,  it  is  unknown 
to  the  Constitution  or  laws." 

And,  commenting  on  the  argument  that 
if  the  Constitution  did  not  authorize  it,  the 
General  ought  not  to  declare  martial  law, 
he  says : 

"Who  could  tolerate  this  idea?  An  Ar 
nold  might,  but  no  patriotic  American 
could.  I  may  be  asked,  upon  what  princi 
ple  a  commander  can  declare  martial  law, 
when  it  is  so  evident  that  the  Constitution 
or  laws  afford  him  no  authority  to  do  so?  I 
answer,  upon  the  principle  of  self-defense, 
which  rises  paramount  to  all  written  laws; 
and  the  justification  of  the  officer  who 
assumes  the  responsibility  of  acting  on  that 
principle,  must  rest  upon  the  necessity  of 
the  case." 

Mr.  Livingston,  in  a  written  document 
submitted  by  General  Jackson  to  the  Court, 
gave  his  opinion  as  follows: 

"  On  the  nature  and  effect  of  the  procla 
mation  of  martial  law  by  Major  General 
Jackson,  my  opinion  is,  that  such  proclama 
tion  is  unknown  to  the  Constitution  and 
laws  of  the  United  States ;  that  it  is  to  be 
justified  only  by  the  necessities  of  the  case." 
etc. 

During  the  Dorr  revolution  in  Rhode 
Island,  when  an  attempt  was  made  to  array 
a  military  force  against  the  old  State  Gov 
ernment,  and  supplant  it  with  a  more  dem 
ocratic  form,  the  State  Government  pro 
claimed  martial  law  throughout  the  State. 
A  house  was  broken  open  to  make  an  ar 
rest  without  warrant,  under  martial  law; 
and  subsequently  an  action  of  trespass  was 
commenced  to  try  the  legality  of  the  act. 
It  was  taken  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States,  and  is  reported,  Luther  vs. 
Borden,  7  Howard,  1. 

It  is  to  be  noticed  that  this  case  presented 
the  precise  question  at  issue  now  before  this 


Court,  for  the  determination  of  the  highest 
Court  in  the  land.  The  case  was  not  the 
suspension  of  the  habeas  corpus,  but  it  was 
for  trespass,  by  breaking  into  nouses  with 
out  warrant,  which  was  clearly  illegal,  un 
less  the  existence  of  martial  law  could  be 
recognized  as  affording  a  defense. 

Chief  Justice  Taney  says: 

"  Unquestionably,  a  State  may  use  its 
military  power  to  put  down  an  armed  in 
surrection  too  strong  to  be  controlled  by 
the  civil  authority.  The  power  is  essential 
to  the  existence  of  every  government,  es 
sential  to  the  preservation  of  order  and 
free  institutions,  and  is  as  necessary  to  the 
States  of  this  Union  as  to  any  other  Gov 
ernment.  The  State,  itself,  must  determine 
what  degree  of  force  the  crisis  demands ; 
and  if  the  Government  of  Rhode  Island 
deemed  the  armed  opposition  so  formidable 
and  so  ramified  throughout  the  State  as  to 
require  the  use  of  its  military  force,  and  a 
declaration  of  martial  law,  we  see  no  ground 
upon  which  this  Court  can  question  its  au 
thority.  It  was  a  state  of  war,  and  the 
established  Government  resorted  to  the 
rights  and  usages  of  war  to  maintain  itself, 
and  to  overcome  the  unlawful  opposition. 
And  in  that  state  of  things,  the  officers  en 
gaged  in  its  military  service  might  lawfully 
arrest  any  one  who,  from  the  information 
before  them,  they  had  reasonable  grounds 
to  believe  was  engaged  in  the  insurrection, 
and  might  order  a  house  to  be  forcibly  en 
tered  and  searched,  when  there  were  rea 
sonable  grounds  for  supposing  he  might  be 
there  concealed.  Without  power  to  do 
this,  martial  law  and  the  military  array  of 
the  Government  would  be  mere  parade,  and 
rather  encourage  attack  than  repel  it." 

Justice  Woodbury  dissented  upon  the 
ground  that  a  State  could  not  declare  mar 
tial  law,  inasmuch  as  the  war  power,  of 
which  it  formed  a  part,  was  lodged  exclu 
sively  in  the  General  Government. 

The  question,  then,  for  this  Commission 
to  determine,  is,  whether,  with  this  armed 
force  threatening  the  life  of  the  nation,  the 
leaders  here  among  you,  secretly  and  cov 
ertly,  as  it  is  claimed — for  this  is  to  be  a 
matter  of  proof — attempting  to  strike  at 
your  camps,  destroy  the  military  forces  that 
are  guarding  them,  release  the  rebel  pris 
oners  there  confined,  then  to  move  into  a 
State,  partly  occupied  by  rebels,  seiae  your 
supplies  and  munitions  of  war  at  Louisville 
and  other  points  throughout  the  country — 
the  question,  I  say,  is,  whether  these  men 
shall  be  dealt  with  by  the  civil  or  by  the 
military  law;  whether  in  this  crisis  they 
shall  be  permitted  to  avail  themselves  of 
the  slow  process  of  civil  justice,  to  be  re 
leased  upon  bail,  again  to  take  the  lead  of 
these  disloyal  forces,  and  move  again  in 
their  work  of  treason  and  anarchy — or 
whether  the  Government  shall  use  the 
power  rightfully  belonging  to  it  for  its  self- 


16 


TREASON  TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


preservation?  I  repeat  the  language  I  have  | 
quoted,  and  say,  that  only  an  Arnold  would,  I 
in  such  a  case,  hesitate  in  the  course  he1 
would  recommend.  No  officer  who  is  faith-  j 
ful  to  his  trust,  who  respects  his  Govern-! 
ment,  who  loves  his  home,  and  desires  the) 

Eeace  and  prosperity  of  the  citizens  of  that  j 
ome,  would  desire  to  wait  till  it  was  too ; 
late  to  save  the  Government,  and,  with  it,  | 
all  he  holds  dear.  Seeing  this  necessity  for  j 
action,  the  military  arm  of  the  Govern 
ment  moved.  It  seized  this  man,  believed 
to  be  one  of  the  leaders — whether  he  be  or 
not,  will  be  a  matter  of  proof  before  this 
Commission — and  of  the  power  of  this  Com 
mission  to  try  him  there  can  be  no  more 
doubt,  than  of  the  power  of  the  Govern 
ment  to  declare  martial  law.  As  to  the 
question  of  the  power  of  the  Government 
to  declare  martial  law  throughout  a  part  or 
the  whole  of  this  land,  there  can  be  no 
doubt,  that  having  been  decided  by  the 
mightiest  tribunal  of  the  land — the  Court 
of  last  resort.  It  only  remains  for  this 
Commission  to  take  up  the  facts  of  the 
case,  and  determine  whether  or  not  they 
are  as  presented  in  the  charges  and  specifi 
cations. 

In  conclusion,  I  submit,  that  while  the 
rights  and  liberties   of  the  citizen   are  in 


all  cases  to  be  held  most  sacred  and  invio 
late,  we  are  not,  in  our  admiration  of  that 
general  principle,  to  lose  sight  of  that  higher 
and  still  more  sacred  duty  of  protecting 
the  life  and  liberty  of  the  nation;  I  might 
say  of  the  lives  and  liberties  of  the  millions 
who  compose  that  nation.  Let  us  not,  in 
our  attempt  to  protect  the  forms  of  the 
Constitution,  sacrifice  its  life.  What  is  that 
Constitution  worth  to  this  land  if  the  na 
tion,  which  is  its  life,  be  destroyed?  Shall 
we,  in  our  fear  of  interfering  with  the  forms 
of  that  Constitution,  hesitate  to  stop  the 
wound  that  is  bleeding  its  life  away  ?  There 
is  something  beyond  the  rights  of  a  single 
individual — something  more  sacred  than  his 
personal  liberty,  when  that  liberty  can  be 
shown  to  have  been  used  to  imperil  the  life 
of  the  nation — and  that  is,  the  life  and  lib 
erty  of  the  millions  of  loyal  citizens  for 
whom  this  Government  was  established, 
and  by  whom,  with  God's  help,  it  will  ever 
be  upheld. 

The  court-room  was  then  cleared  for  de 
liberation.  On  being  reopened,  the  Judge 
Advocate  announced  that  the  plea  was 
overruled,  and  that  the  Commission  would 
proceed  to  the  trial  of  the  accused. 

The  Commission  adjourned,  to  meet  on 
Tuesday,  September  27,  at  2  o'clock,  P.  M. 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


17 


COUBT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,        ) 
September  27,  1864,  2  o'clock,  P.  M.j 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  ad 
journment. 

The  same  members  present  as  on  Friday, 
September  23d ;  also  the  Judge  Advocate, 
the  accused,  and  his  counsel. 

Colonel  C.  D.  Murray  being  in  Court,  and 
having  heard  read  the  Order  convening  the 
Commission,  the  accused  was  asked  if  he 
had  any  objection  to  Colonel  Murray  taking 
his  seat  on  the  Commission,  to  which  he  re 
plied,  "I  have  not." 

Colonel  Murray  being  then  duly  sworn 
by  the  Judge  Advocate,  in  the  presence  of 
the  accused,  took  his  seat  on  the  Commis 
sion. 

The  accused  was  then  arraigned  on  the 
following  charges  and  specifications  : 

CHARGES    AND    SPECIFICATIONS 

PREFERRED    AGAINST 

HARRISON  H.  DODD, 

A  Citizen  of  the  State  of  Indiana,   United  Statet 
of  America. 


CHARGE    FIRST.— Conspiracy   against   the 
Government  of  the   United  States. 

SPECIFICATION  FIRST. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Harrison  H.  Dodd  did,  with  William 
A.  Bowles,  of  Indiana,  Joshua  F.  Bullitt, 
of  Kentucky,  Richard  Barrett,  of  the  State 
of  Missouri,  and  others,  conspire  against 
the  Government  and  duly  constituted  au 
thorities  of  the  United  States,  and  did  join 
himself  to,  and  secretly  organize  and  dis 
seminate,  a  secret  society  or  order,  known 
as  the  Order  of  American  Knights,  or  Order 
of  the  Sons  of  Liberty,  having  a  civil  and 
military  organization  and  jurisdiction,  for 
the  purpose  of  overthrowing  the  Govern 
ment  and  duly  constituted  authorities  of 
the  United  States.  This  at  or  near  the 
city  of  Indianapolis,  Indiana,  on  or  about 
the  16th  day  of  May,  1864. 

SPECIFICATION  SECOND. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Harrison  H.  Dodd,  during  an  existing 
rebellion  against  the  Government  and  au 
thorities  of  the  United  States,  said  rebellion 
claiming  to  be  in  the  name  and  on  behalf 
of  certain  States,  being  a  part  of  and  owing 
allegiance  to  the  United  States,  did  com 
bine  and  agree  with  one  William  A.  Bowles, 
to  adopt  and  impart  to  others  the  creed  or 
ritual  of  a  secret  society  or  order,  known 
as  the  Order  of  American  Knights,  or  Order 
of  the  Sons  of  Liberty,  denying  the  author 
ity  of  the  United  States  to  coerce  to  sub 
mission  certain  citizens  of  said  United 
States,  designing  to  lessen  thereby  the  pow 
er  and  prevent  the  increase  of  the  armies 
of  the  United  States,  and  thereby  did  re 
cognize  and  sustain  the  right  of  the  citizens 


and  States  then  in  rebellion  to  disregard 
and  resist  the  authority  of  the  United 
States.  This  at  or  near  the  city  of  Indi 
anapolis,  Indiana,  on  or  about  the  16th 
day  of  May,  1864. 

SPECIFICATION  THIRD. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Harrison  H.  Dodd,  then  a  citizen  of 
the  State  of  Indiana,  owing  true  faith  and 
allegiance  to  the  Government  of  the  United 
States,  and  while  pretending  to  be  a  peace 
ful  and  loyal  citizen  of  said  Government, 
did  secretly  and  covertly  combine,  agree, 
and  conspire  with  one  William  A.  Bowles, 
of  the  State  of  Indiana,  Joshua  F.  Bullitt, 
of  the  State  of  Kentucky,  Richard  Barrett, 
of  the  State  of  Missouri,  and  others,  to 
overthrow  and  render  powerless  the  Gov 
ernment  of  the  United  States,  and  did,  in 
pursuance  of  said  combination,  agreement, 
and  conspiracy  with  said  parties,  form  and 
organize  a  society  or  order,  and  did  assist  in 
extending  said  secret  order  or  organization, 
known  as  the  Order  of  American  Knights, 
or  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty,  whose  in 
tent  and  purpose  was  to  cripple  and  render 
powerless  the  efforts  of  the  Government  of 
the  United  States  in  suppressing  a  then 
existing  formidable  rebellion  against  the 
Government  of  the  United  States.  This 
on  or  about  the  16th  day  of  May,  1864,  at 
or  near  the  city  of  Indianapolis,  Indiana. 

SPECIFICATION  FOURTH. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Harrison  H.  Dodd  did  conspire  and 
agree  with  William  A.  Bowles,  David  T. 
Yeakle,  L.  P.  Milligan,  Andrew  Humphreys, 
John  C.  Walker,  and  J.  F.  Bullitt— these 
men  at  that  time  holding  military  positions 
and  rank  in  a  certain  secret  society  or  or 
ganization  known  as  the  Order  of  Ameri 
can  Knights,  or  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Lib 
erty — to  seize,  by  force,  the  United  States 
and  State  Arsenals,  at  Indianapolis,  Indi 
ana,  and  Columbus,  Ohio;  to  release,  by 
force,  the  rebel  prisoners  held  by  the  au 
thorities  of  the  United  States,  at  Camp 
Douglas,  Illinois;  Camp  Morton,  Indiana; 
and  Camp  Chase,  Ohio;  and  at  the  Depot 
of  Prisoners  of  War,  on  Johnson's  Island  ; 
and  to  arm  those  prisoners  with  the  arms 
thus  seized;  that  then  said  conspirators,  with 
all  the  force  they  were  able  to  raise  from  the 
secret  order  above  named,  were,  in  con 
junction  with  the  rebel  prisoners  thus  re 
leased  and  armed,  to  march  into  Kentucky, 
and  co-operate  with  the  rebel  forces  to  be 
sent  to  that  State  by  the  rebel  authorities, 
against  the  Government  and  authorities  of 
the  United  States.  This  on  or  about  the 
20th  day  of  July,  1864,  at  or  near  the  city 
of  Chicago,  Illinois. 

CHARGE  SECOND.— Affording  aid  and  com 
fort  to  rebels  against  the  authority  of  the  Uni 
ted  States. 

SPECIFICATION  FIRST.— In  this,  that  the  said 
Harrison  H.  Dodd,  being  then  a  member 
of  a  certain  secret  society,  or  order,  known 


18 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


as  the  Order  of  the  American  Knights,  or  Or 
der  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty,  the  United  States 
then  being  in  arms  to  suppress  a  rebellion 
in  certain  States  against  the  authority  of 
the  United  States,  and  said  Dodd,  then  and 
there  acting  as  a  member  and  Grand  Com 
mander,  so  styled,  of  said  secret  society 
or  order,  did  design  and  plot  to  communi 
cate  with  the  enemies  of  the  United  States, 
and  did  communicate  with  the  enemies  of 
the  United  States,  with  the  intent  that 
they  should,  in  large  force,  invade  the  ter 
ritory  of  the  United  States,  to-wit,  the  States 
of  Kentucky,  Indiana,  and  Illinois,  with  the 
further  intent  that  the  so-called  secret  so 
ciety,  or  order  aforesaid,  should  then  and 
there  co-operate  with  the  said  armed  forces 
of  the  said  rebellion  against  the  authority  of 
the  United  States.  This  at  or  near  Indian 
apolis,  Indiana,  on  or  about  the  16th  day 
of  May,  1864. 

SPECIFICATION  SECOND. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Harrison  H.  Dodd,  while  the  Govern 
ment  of  the  United  States  was  attempting 
by  force  of  arms  to  suppress  an  existing  re 
bellion,  and  while  guerrillas  and  other 
armed  supporters  of  said  rebellion,  were  in 
the  State  of  Kentucky,  did  send  a  messen 
ger — then  a  brother  member  with  him  of  a 
secret  society  or  order,  known  as  the  Order 
of  American  Knights  or  Sons  of  Liberty — 
into  said  State  of  Kentucky,  with  instruc 
tions  for  J.  F.  Bullitt,  Grand  Commander 
of  said  secret  society  or  order  in  said  State, 
and  other  members  of  said  secret  society 
or  order  in  said  State,  to  select  good  couri 
ers  or  runners,  to  go  upon  short  notice,  and 
for  the  purpose  of  assisting  those  in  rebel 
lion  against  the  United  States,  to  call  to 
arms  the  members  of  said  secret  society  or 
order,  and  other  sympathizers  with  the  ex 
isting  rebellion,  whenever  a  signal  should  be 
given  by  the  authorities  of  the  said  secret 
society  or  order.  This  at  or  near  Indian 
apolis,  Indiana,  on  or  about  the  16th  day 
of  May,  1864. 

SPECIFICATION  THIRD. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Harrison  H.  Dodd,  during  an  existing 
rebellion  against  the  authority  of  the  Uni 
ted  States,  he  knowing  that  in  Kentucky 
there  were  various  armed  forces  in  the  inter 
est  of  said  rebellion,  and  that  said  State 
wa,s  in  constant  danger  of  invasion  by  fur 
ther  rebel  forces,  did  attempt  therein  to 
organize  and  extend  a  secret  society  or 
order,  known  as  the  Order  of  American 
Knights,  or  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty, 
having  for  its  object  to  aid  and  assist  said 
rebellion,  and  to  treat  the  United  States 
Government,  in  its  efforts  to  suppress  said 
rebellion,  as  a  usurpation.  This  at  or 
near  Indianapolis,  Indiana,  on  or  about  the 
16th  day  of  May,  1864. 

SPECIFICATION  FOURTH. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Harrison  H.  Dodd,  being  a  citizen  of 
the  State  of  Indiana,  United  States  of 
America,  owing  true  allegiance  to  the  said 


United  States,  did  join  himself  to  a  certain 
secret  society  or  order,  known  as  the  Order 
of  American  Knights,  or  Order  of  the  Sons 
of  Liberty,  the  object  of  which  society  or 
order  was  hostile  to,  and  designed  for*  the 
overthrow  of,  the  Government  of  the  Uni 
ted  States,  and  to  compel  terms  with  the 
citizens  or  authorities  of  the  so-called  Con 
federate  States,  the  same  being  portions  of 
the  United  States  in  rebellion  against  the 
authority  of  the  United  States,  and  did  com 
municate  the  designs  and  intent  of  said 
order  to  those  in  rebellion  against  the  Gov 
ernment  of  the  United  States.  This  at  or 
near  Indianapolis,  Indiana,  on  or  about  the 
16th  day  of  May,  1864. 

CHARGE  THIRD.— Inciting  Insurrection. 

SPECIFICATION  FIRST. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Harrison  H.  Dodd  did,  during  a  time 
of  war  between  the  United  States  and 
armed  enemies  of  the  United  States,  or 
ganize,  and  attempt  to  arm,  a  portion  of 
the  citizens  of  the  United  States,  through  a 
secret  society  or  order,  known  as  the  Amer 
ican  Knights,  or  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Lib 
erty,  with  the  intent  to  induce  them,  with 
him,  to  throw  off  the  authority  of  the 
United  States,  and  co-operate  with  an  armed 
insurrection,  then  existing  against  the  le 
gally  constituted  authorities  of  the  United 
States.  This  at  or  near  Indianapolis,  Indi 
ana,  on  or  about  the  16th  day  of  May,  1864. 

SPECIFICATION  SECOND. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Harrison  H.  Dodd  did,  by  public  ad 
dresses,  and  by  secret  circulars  and  commu 
nications,  and  by  other  means,  endeavor  to 
and  did  arouse  sentiments  of  hostility  to  the 
Government  of  the  United  States,  and  did 
endeavor  to  induce  the  people  openly  to 
revolt  against  said  Government,  and  to  se 
cretly  arm  and  organize  themselves,  for 
the  purpose  of  resisting  the  laws  of  the 
United  States  and  the  orders  of  the  duly 
elected  President  thereof.  This  at  or  near 
the  city  of  Indianapolis,  Indiana,  on  or 
about  the  16th  day  of  February,  1864. 

CHARGE  FOURTH.— Disloyal  Practices. 

SPECIFICATION  FIRST. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Harrison  H.  Dodd,  during  an  armed 
rebellion  against  the  legally  constituted  au 
thorities  and  Government  of  the  United 
States,  did  counsel  and  advise  citizens  of, 
and  owing  allegiance  and  Military  service 
to,  the  United  States,  to  disregard  the  au 
thority  of  the  United  States,  and  to  resist 
a  call  or  draft,  designed  to  increase  the 
armies  of  the  United  States.  This  at  or  near 
the  city  of  Indianapolis,  Indiana,  on  or 
about  the  16th  day  of  May,  1864. 

SPECIFICATION  SECOND. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Harrison  H.  Dodd  did  accept  and  hold 
the  office  of  Grand  Commander,  or  Com- 
mander-in-Chief,  of  the  Military  forces,  for 
the  State  of  Indiana,  in  a  certain  secret 
society  or  order,  known  as  'the  Order  of 


TREASON    TRIALS   AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


19 


Ajuerican  Knights,  or  Order  of  the  Sons  of 
Liberty,  which  said  officer  and  order  were 
unknown  to  the  Constitution  or  Laws  of  the 
United  States,  and  were  not  in  aid  of,  but 
opposed  to,  the  constituted  legal  authori 
ties  thereof.  This  at  or  near  the  city  of 
Indianapolis,  Indiana,  on  or  about  the  16th 
day  of  February,  1864. 

SPECIFICATION  THIRD. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Harrison  H.  Dodd  did  appoint,  and 
aid  to  appoint,  and  did  recognize,  within 
the  State  of  Indiana,  and  within  the  ju 
risdiction  of  the  United  States ,  and  while 
acting  as  Grand  Commander,  or  Command- 
er-in-Chief,  of  certain  Military  forces,  in  the 
State  of  Indiana,  a  certain  secret  society  or 
order,  known  as  the  Order  of  American 
Knights,  of  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Lib 
erty,  certain  persons  by  the  title  and  grade 
of  Major  General,  the  same  being  unknown 
to  the  Military  Laws  of  the  United  States, 
or  to  the  Military  Laws  of  the  State  of  In 
diana,  and  did  treat  and  accredit  them  as 
such,  subordinate  to  him  as  Grand  Com 
mander,  for  the  purpose  of  creating  and 
perfecting  a  military  organization  within  the 
United  States,  hostile  to,  and  designed  to 
overthrow,  the  Government  and  the  legally 
constituted  authorities  of  the  United  States. 
This  at  or  near  the  city  of  Indianapolis,  Indi 
ana,  on  or  about  the  16th  day  of  May.  1864. 

SPECIFICATION  FOURTH. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Harrison  II.  Dodd  did,  while  assuming 
to  act  as  Grand  Commander,  or  Commancl- 
er-in-Ohief.  of  certain  Military  forces  in  the 
State  of  Indiana,  and  within  the  jurisdic 
tion  of  the  United  States,  of  a  certain  order, 
known  as  the  Order  of  American  Knights, 
or  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty,  recognize 
as  the  highest  Military  authority  in  the 
United  States  an  officer  unknown  to  the 
Constitution  and  Laws  of  the  United  States, 
styled  Supreme  Commander,  or  Command- 
er-in-Chief  of  all  Military  forces  belonging 
to  the  order  in  the  various  States,  for  the 
United  States,  said  officer  being  recognized 
by  said  Dodd  as  clothed  with  authority 
over  all  the  military  forces  of  said  order 
within  the  United  States  when  called  into 
active  service,  and  holding  his,  the  said 
Dodd's,  obligation  of  obedience  to  said  Su 
preme  Commander  to  be  absolute  and  un 
limited,  and  paramount  to  the  laws  of  the 
land,  or  orders  emanating  from  the  author 
ities  or  President  of  the  United  States.  This 
at  or  near  the  city  of  Indianapolis,  Indiana, 
on  or  about  the  17th  day  of  February,  1864. 

SPECIFICATION  FIFTH. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Harrison  II.  Dodd  did  attempt  to  pre 
vent  the  further  enlistment  of  citizens  in 
the  armies  of  the  United  States,  declaring 
the  Government  thereof  to  be  a  usurpation, 
and  to  be  expelled  by  force  of  arms ;  and 
did  take,  and  cause  other  citizens  to  take, 
a  solemn  oath,  inconsistent  with  and  in 
violation  of  their  duties  as  citizens  of  the 
United  States,  and  did  attempt  to  arm  cer 


tain  disloyal  citizens  of  the  United  States, 
for  the  purpose  of  resisting  the  laws  and 
duly^  constituted  authorities  of  the  United 
States,  and  for  the  purpose  of  establishing, 
or  assisting  to  establish,  a  separate  and 
independent  government  within  the  limits 
of  the  United  States.  This  at  or  near  the 
city  of  Indianapolis,  Indiana,  on  or  about 
the  17th  day  of  February,  1864. 

CHARGE  FIFTH.— Violation  of  the  Lawn 
of   War, 

SPECIFICATION  FIRST. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Harrison  II.  Dodd  did,  while  the  Uni 
ted  States  were  carrying  on  war  against  the 
enemies  of  the  United  States,  and  while 
pretending  to  be  a  peaceable,  loyal  citizen 
of  the  United  States,  violate  his  allegiance 
and  duty  as  a  citizen  of  said  Government, 
and  did  attempt  to  introduce  said  armed 
enemies  of  the  United  States  into  the  loyal 
States  of  the  United  States,  thereby  to 
overthrow  and  destroy  the  authority  of  the 
United  States.  This  at  or  near  the  city  of 
Indianapolis,  Indiana,  on  or  about  the  16th 
day  of  May,  1864. 

SPECIFICATION  SECOND. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Harrison  H.  Dodd  did,  during  a  war 
between  the  United  States  and  the  ene 
mies  of  the  United  States,  and  while  pre 
tending  to  be  a  peaceable,  loyal  citizen  of 
the  United  States,  organize  and  extend  a 
certain  secret  society  or  order,  known  as  the 
Order  of  American  Knights,  or  Sons  of 
Liberty,  having  for  its  purpose  the  same 
general  object  and  design  of  the  said  ene 
mies  of  the  United  States,  and  with  the 
intent  to  aid  and  insure  the  success  of  said 
enemies  in  their  resistance  to  the  legally 
constituted  authorities  of  the  United  States, 
This  at  or  near  the  city  of  Indianapolis, 
Indiana,  on  or  about  the  16th  day  of  May, 
1864.  H.  L.  BURNETT, 

Judge   Advocate   Department   of    the    Ohio  and 

Northern  Department. 

To  which  Charges  and  Specifications,  to 
all  and  severally,  the  accused  pleaded  NOT 
GUILTY. 

FELIX  G.  STIDGER,  a  witness  for  the  Gov 
ernment,  was  then  introduced  into  Court, 
and  being  duly, sworn  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate,  testified  as  follows  :* 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate.  State 
your  name  and  place  of  residence^. 

Answer.  Felix  G.  Stidger.  I  resided  all 
the  summer  in  Louisville  till  the  first  of 
September;  I  am  now  living  in  Illinois.  I 
resided  four  months  and  a  half  in  Louis 
ville  before  going  to  Illinois. 


*The  admirable  manner  in  wnich  Mr.  Stidger  acted  the 
part  of  a  United  States  Detective,  was  shown  by  the  fact, 
that  up  to  the  moment  of  his  appearance  as  a  witness,  the 
accused  had  no  suspicion  of  hlo  l»«ing  other  than  a 
co-conspirator.  At  uie  instant  of  Stidger's  appenrrtiice 
on  the  witness  stand,  Dodd  stared  at  him  in  bewildered 
surprise,  as  though  he  found  it  difficult  to  admit  the  evi 
dence  of  his  own  tenses. 


20 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


Q.  Where  did  you  live  previous  to  that 
time? 

A.  I  was  in  Taylorsville,  Kentucky,  thirty- 
one  miles  south-east  of  Louisville,  for  ten 
months  previous  to  that. 

Q.  Are  you  a  Dative  of  Kentucky  ? 

A.  I  am,  sir. 

Q.  Please  to  state  to  the  Commission 
where,  if  ever,  you  had  any  knowledge  of 
the  existence  of  a  secret  society,  or  order, 
known  as  the  Order  of  American  Knights, 
or  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty;  when  your 
attention  was  first  directed  to  it,  and  how. 

A.  On  the  6th  day  of  May  I  started  from 
Louisville,  Kentucky,  and  went  to  Dr. 
Bowles  and  conversed  with  him  on  the 
subject  of  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty. 
He  gave  me  the  first  information  on  the 
subject. 

Q.  State  how  you  came  to  go  to  Dr. 
Bowies'  to  converse  upon  that  subject. 

A.  I  was  sent  there  by  Captain  S.  E. 
Jones,  Provost  Marshal  of  the  District  of 
Kentucky,  to  converse  with  Dr.  Bowles 
upon  the  subject  of  this  secret  order. 

Q.  Did  you,  in  that  conversation,  learn  of 
the  existence  of  any  such  order? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  I  did. 

Q.  State  what  was  your  next  step  in  ob 
taining  information  upon  the  subject. 

A  My  next  information  was  in  a  second 
interview  I  had  with  Dr.  Bowles  at  his 
house  at  French  Lick  Springs.  That  was 
about  the  20th  of  May,  I  think.  For  the 
first  interview  I  started  on  the  6th,  and 
arrived  there  on  the  9th  of  May,  1864. 

Q.  State  whether  you  were  ever  initiated 
into  any  secret  order;  if  so,  state  when  and 
where? 

A.  I  was  regularly  initiated  in  the  First 
Temple  Degree  of  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of 
Liberty  only,  the  Vestibule.  The  first  de 
gree  was  given  me  in  Louisville.  The 
second  degree  I  heard,  but  did  not  take. 
The  third  degree  I  was  instructed  in,  in  this 
city,  by  Mr.  Harrison. 

Q.  When  was  that? 

A.  It  was  about  the  5th  or  6th  day  of 
June,  1864. 

Q.  Who  is  this  Mr.  Harrison  ? 

A.  He  represented  himself  as  the  Secre 
tary  of  the  Grand  Council  of  this  State. 

Q.  State  where,  if  ever,  you  have  come 
in  contact  with  Harrison  H.  Dodd,  the  ac 
cused,  in  connection  with  this  organization. 

A.  I  have.  I  saw  him  on  the  same  day 
that  Harrison  instructed  me  in  the  third 
degree,  That  was  on  the  first  Sunday  in 
June. 

Q.   Where  did  you  first  meet  Mr.  Dodd? 

A.  I  first  saw  him  in  the  office  of  Mr. 
Bingham,  editor  of  the  Indianapolis  Sen 
tinel 

Q.  Who  was  present? 

A.  Mr.  Bingham  wa«  there — at  least  I 
received  an  introduction  to  a  gentleman  as 
such. 


Q.  What  conversation,  if  any,  took  place 
between  you  and  Mr.  Dodd  at  that  time? 

A.  I  presented  a  letter  of  introduction 
from  Judge  Bullitt,  and  was  recognized  by 
Mr.  Dodd  as  the  person  referred  to  in  the 
letter. 

Q.  What  became  of  that  letter? 

A.  I  gave  it  to  Mr.  Dodd. 

Q.  Was  that  any  thing  more  than  a  letter 
of  introduction,  or  did  it  accredit  you  as  a 
member  of  the  order? 

A.  Here  is  the  letter.  [The  witness  here 
produced  the  letter.] 

Q.  Do  you  know  it  to  be  Judge  Bullitt' s 
signature? 

A.  I  saw  him  sign  it.  I  got  the  letter 
this  morning  at  General  Carrington's  head 
quarters.  How  it  got  there,  I  do  not  know. 

[^he  letter  referred  to  was  then  offered 
in  evidence  by  the  Judge  Advocate.] 

Q.  You  may  now  state  what  your  con 
versation  with  Mr.  Dodd  was,  when  you  de 
livered  that  letter. 

A.  I  was  sent  to  Dr.  Bowles  and  Mr. 
Dodd  by  Judge  Bullitt,  in  reference  to  Mr. 
Coffin,  who  was  living  in  this  city,  and  who 
was  then  employed  as  a  Detective  officer  by 
the  Government.  My  instructions  were, 
that  Coffin  was  to  be  put  out  of  the  way  at 
all  hazards. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  being  "put  out 
of  the  way?" 

A.  I  understood  he  was  to  be  murdered. 
I  stated  my  instructions  to  Mr.  Dodd. 

Q.  From  whom  did  you  receive  those 
instructions  ? 

A.  They  were  from  Judge  Bullitt  to  Dr. 
Bowles  and  Mr.  Dodd,  and  whoever  else  I 
might  think  well  to  communicate  it  to. 

Q.  Who  did  that  message  relate  to? 

A.  To  Mr.  Coffin,  United  States  Detective. 

Q.  What'  was  said  by  Mr.  Dodd  in  refer 
ence  to  that  message? 

A.  I  do  not  remember  distinctly,  except 
that  Coffin  and  such  men  were  to  be  dis 
posed  of. 

Q.  What  injury  had  Coffin  done  to  Dodd, 
or  to  Bullitt,  or  Bowles? 

A.  I  do  not  know  of  any,  except  that  he 
was  acquainted  with  their  secrets;  I  mean 
the  secrets  of  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of 
Liberty. 

Q.  What  was  done  by  Dodd  in  this 
matter? 

A.  There  was  nothing  in  particular  done, 
but  he  expressed  himself  in  favor  of  Coffin 
being  disposed  of,  and  that  he  agreed  with 
Judge  Bullitt. 

Q.  Do  you  know  if  Dodd  was  a  member 
of  the  Order  of  American  Knights,  or  of 
the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty? 

A.  He  did  not  say  in  so  many  words  that 
he  was.  I  found  it  out  afterward,  from 
what  he  said,  and  from  what  others  said. 

Q.  State  if  any  thing  was  done  in  refer 
ence  to  the  contemplated  assassination  of 
Mr.  Coffin. 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


21 


A.  Not  at  that  time. 

Q.  How  long  were  you  present  in  your 
interview  with  Mr.  Dodd? 

A.  Probably  an  hour,  or  more. 

Q.  Was  that  the  only  subject  under  dis 
cussion? 

A.  Nothing  particular  do  I  recall  now, 
except  some  outside  matters. 

Q.  Was  any  thing  said  at  that  interview 
respecting  the  Order  ? 

A.  Not  a  word. 

Q.  When  did  you  next  see  Dodd? 

A.  On  the  14th  day  of  June.  It  was  the 
5th  or  6th  of  June  that  I  first  saw  him.  It 
was  the  first  Sunday  in  June. 

Q.  How  are  you  able  to  fix  the  dates  of 
these  interviews  with  exactness? 

A.  By  knowing  the  date  of  the  meeting 
of  the  Grand  Council  of  the  Order  of  the 
Sons  of  Liberty,  which  was  on  that  day. 

Q.  Where  did  they  meet? 

A.  In  the  fourth  story  of  the  building 
occupied  by  Mr.  Dodd,  as  printer. 

Q.  Were  you  present  at  that  time  at  that 
meeting? 

A.  I  was. 

Q.  State  how  many  persons  you  met  at 
that  time,  and  mention  their  names. 

A.  I  can  recollect  Mr.  Dodd,  Mr.  Harri 
son,  Dr.  Bowles,  Mr.  Milligan,  Mr.  Hum 
phreys,  and  Dr.  Gatling,*  and  there  were 
others  whose  names  I  do  not  remember. 

Q.  What  process  had  one  to  go  through 
to  gain  admission  to  those  meetings  ? 

A.  It  was  by  a  password.  The  password 
was  the  word  of  the  order.  On  the  day  re 
ferred  to,  the  password  was  "  America." 

Q.  Was  that  the  word  by  which  you 
gained  admission  to  the  meeting? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  was  in  the  room  when  the 
meeting  commenced.  I  was  known  as  a 
third  degree  member,  and  the  word  was 
given  after  I  got*  into  the  room.  It  was 
given  to  every  person  in  the  room  by  Mr. 
Dodd. 

Q.  Did  you  at  the  time  hold  any  office  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  was  Secretary  of  the  Grand 
Council  for  the  State  of  Kentucky.  At  that 
time  we  had  no  organized  Grand  Council. 
I  was  appointed  by  the  Chief  Officer  of  the 
State. 

Q.  Who  was  that? 

A.  Judge  Bullitt. 

Q.  Do  you  still  hold  that  position  in  Ken 
tucky? 

A.  I  do  not  know  if  such  an  office  now 
exists ;  but  if  it  does,  I  may  still  be  consid 
ered  as  holding  that  position. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  that  you  were  at  that 
meeting  on  the  14th  or  15th  of  June,  1864  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  I  was ;  and  Mr.  Dodd  was 
there  too. 

Q.  State,  as  nearly  as  you  can,  what  took 
place  at  that  meeting. 


*The  inventor  of  the  guu,  with  revolving  rifle  barrels, 
mounted  on  wheels,  kuowu  as  tlio  Gatling  guu,  and 
exhibited  iu  many  Northern  cities  during  1861. 


A.  Mr.  Dodd  opened  the  meeting  by  re 
marking  that  they  wanted  to  define  the 
politics  of  the  order ;  if  they  had  any,  he 
wanted  to  know  what  they  were.  Commit 
tees  were  appointed  to  consider  the  military 
organization  of  the  order.  There  was  also 
a  Committee  on  Education,  and  one  to  ex 
amine  into  a  secret  discovery  of  a  member 
of  the  order;  and  there  were  other  com 
mittees,  the  objects  of  which  I  do  not  now 
recollect.  Then  the  case  of  Coffin  wa^ 
brought  up  before  the  Council  and  discussed 
at  length. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  before  the  whole  meet 
ing? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  before  the  whole  Council. 

Q.  What  was  the  nature  of  that  discus 
sion? 

A.  About  various  things  Coffin  had  done 
as  a  detective  for  the  benefit  of  the  United 
States  Government ;  and  it  was  finally  de 
cided  that  he  should  be  murdered. 

Q.  Was  that  the  decision  of  the  order  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  It  was  known  that  there 
was  to  be  a  meeting  at  Hamilton,  Ohio,  on 
the  next  day,  and  it  was  supposed  Coffin 
would  be  there.  Mr.  Dodd  called  on  the 
meeting  to  know  what  members  would  vol 
unteer  to  go  to  the  meeting  with  him,  t« 
put  Coffin  out  of  the  way.  There  was  a 
man  by  the  name  of  McBride,  from  Evans- 
ville,  Ind.,  who  said  he  knew  Mr.  Coffin 
well,  but  he  was  sorry  he  was  so  situated 
he  could  not  go.  That  closed  the  proceed 
ings  of  the  morning,  and  is  all  I  remember 
of  it  now.  We  met  from  10  to  12  o'clock. 
In  the  evening  the  committee  reported; 
they  reported  in  favor  of  a  military  organi 
zation  of  the  order,  and  of  organizing  and 
equipping  as  rapidly  as  possible.  That  com 
mittee  was  composed  of  Dr.  Bowles,  Mr. 
Milligan,  Dr.  Gatling,  and  other  names  I  do 
not  remember.  I  distinctly  remember  that 
they  wished  the  military  organization  should 
be  completed  as  quickly  as  possible.  Some 
proposed  to  raise  means  by  taxing  the  mem 
bers  of  the  Order;  some  by  subscriptions; 
and  others  voted  that  the  members  should 
individually  arm  themselves.  They  finally 
decided  that  each  sub-district  should  arm  as 
they  could.  The  subject  of  education  was 
discussed,  and  a  resolution  was  offered  on 
the,  subject,  recommending  the  establish 
ment  of  Democratic  schools.  I  do  not  re 
member  whether  the  resolution  was  over 
ruled  or  not. 

Q.  Was  any  thing  further  done  respecting 
Coffin,  at  the  morning  meeting  ? 

A.  His  case  was  put  off  till  the  evening. 
[t  was  discussed  both  morning  and  evening. 
Mr.  Dodd  volunteered  to  go  to  Hamilton, 
and,  if  Coffin  was  there,  to  dispose  of  him ; 
and  he  wanted  to  know  who  would  go  with 
him,  as  I  have  before  stated. 

Q.  What  was  the  final  arrangement  for 
disposing  of  Coffin,  at  Hamilton? 

A.  I  met  Mr.  Dodd  and  Dr.  Bowles.     They 


22 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


asked  me  if  I  had  seen  Coffin.  I  told  them 
that  I  did  not  know  the  man.  They  said 
they  did  not  believe  he  was  there;  they 
hunted  for  him,  but  could  not  find  him  at 
the  meeting,  and  nothing  further  was  deter 
mined  upon  with  respect  to  the  day,  or 
place  of  rendezvous. 

Q.  State,  if  you  know,  how  far  the  organ 
ization  of  this  order  partook  of  the  nature 
of  a  military  organization,  and  whether 
they  had  drills,  and  officers,  and  reports, 
similar  to  those  appertaining  to  the  organi 
zation  of  an  army. 

A.  I  can  not  say  any  thing  more  than 
what  I  was  told.  Dr.  Bowles  told  me  that 
he  had  his  command  organized,  and  divided 
into  regiments  and  companies,  and  officers 
appointed,  except  in  one  district,  and  he 
told  me  that  he  was  going  to  organize  that 
district,  and  that  they  were  drilling  at  any 
snatch  times  they  could  get. 

Q.  When  was  this  told  to  you  ? 

A.  Previous  to  that  meeting. 

Q.  Do  you  know,  of  your  own  knowledge, 
any  thing  of  the  military  organization  of 
the  order  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  see  them  drilling? 

A.  No,  sir,  and  know  of  none,  except 
what  Dr.  Bowles  and  other  members  of  the 
order  told  me. 

Q.  Did  Mr.  Dodd  tell  you  any  thing  at 
any  time  about  drilling  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  State  when  next  you  saw  Dr.  Bowles 
or  Mr.  Dodd,  and  where — that  is,  after  the 
meeting  on  the  14th  day  of  June,  1864. 

A.  I  next  saw  Dr.  Bowles  in  Louisville,  at 
the  Louisville  Hotel.  I  think  I  never  saw 
Mr.  Dodd  any-where  except  here,  and  once 
in  Hamilton. 

Q.  What  was  Bowles  doing  at  Louisville? 

A.  He  was  getting  up  and  superintending 
the  Greek  fire  arrangement.  He  had  a 
chemist  there,  and  was  experimenting  and 
explaining  it  to  the  members  who  were 
present.  This  Greek  fire,  as  it  was  called, 
was  invented  by  a  man  named  R.  C.  Bock- 
ing.*  The  "members  of  this  order  were  to 
use  it  for  the  purpose  of  destroying  Govern 
ment  property. 

Q.  Did  you  see  Bowles  there  with  this 
man  Booking? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  I  did ;  he  was  experimenting 
and  explaining. 

Q.  Had  you  any  further  talk  with  Bowles 
about  the  military  organization  of  this  or 
der  at  that  time  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  It  was  in  substance  the  same 
as  the  conversation  we  had  had  before, 
namely,  that  they  were  completing  their 
military  organization  as  fast  as  possible. 

Q.  Did  he  say  that  they  were  drilling  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 


*  A  resident  of  Cincinnati  ;  formerly  a  commission 
merchant.  Subsequently  a  captain  of  artillery,  United 
States  Volunteers. 


Q.  Did  lie  say  any  thing  about  opposing 
the  draft  and  enlistments  ? 

A.  I  do  not  remember  that  any  thing  was 
said  about  that.  They  did  not  seem  to  care 
about  the  draft. 

Q.  Was  any  thing  said  about  it  at  the 
meeting  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  What  was  their  avowed  purpose  then? 

A.  Their  organization  was  for  the  general 
purpose  of  opposing  the  Government  in 
every  possible  way,  and  by  force  of  arms, 
and  they  expected  to  co-operate  with  the 
rebel  forces. 

Q.  Who  told  you  so? 

A.  Mr.  Dodd  and  Dr.  Bowles  both  told  me 
so. 

Q.  What  further  passed  between  you  and 
Dr.  Bowles  at  Louisville  ? 

A.  He  was  present  at  the  experiments. 
He  introduced  us  to  the  company,  and  this 
man  Booking  went  to  work  to  explain  the 
hand  grenades,  and  the  machine  for  setting 
boats  and  Government  buildings  on  fire. 
This  machine  will  set  a  building  on  fire  at 
a  given  time ;  it  is  something  like  a  clock. 
It  is  wound  up,  and  at  a  certain  time  it  will 
set  any  boat  or  building  on  fire,  in  which  it 
may  be  left.  It  is  put  in  a  box  or  trunk, 
and  might  be  put  on  board  a  boat  or  left 
in  a  house  without  exciting  any  suspicion. 
Mr.  Booking  also  had  a  muster-roll  of  rebel 
prisoners,  that  were  designed  to  be  turned 
over  to  the  rebel  army.  He  said  a  part  of 
them  who  had  enlisted  in  an  Indiana  Bat 
tery  had  deserted  in  Tennessee,  and  had 
carried  over  a  portion  of  a  battery  with 
them. 

Q.  Did  Bowles  inform  you  that  any  Gov 
ernment  stores  had  been  destroyed  by  this 
invention  you  have  described? 

A.  He  did  not  at  that  time,  but  he  did 
before.  He  said  that  those  two  boats  that 
were  destroyed  at  the  wharf,  at  Louisville, 
were  burned  by  this  Greek  fire  arrange 
ment.  He  *  said  that  there  had  been  fires 
before,  and  that  they  had  been  caused  by 
this  Greek  fire,  and  had  been  done  by  this 
Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty. 

Q  Did  that  close  your  interview  at  Louis 
ville? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  State  what  your  next  connection  with 
the  order  was,  whom  you  saw,  and  what 
was  said. 

A.  I  was  in  constant  communication  in 
Louisville  with  Dr.  Bullitt  and  some  other 
members  of  Kentucky,  and  also  when  I  was 
up  here. 

Q  Can  you  name  the  next  time  you  saw 
Mr.  Dodd  or  Dr.  Bowles? 

A.  The  next  time  I  saw  Dr.  Bowles  was 
at  his  own  house,  about  the  last  of  July. 

Q.  What  was  said  and  done  there? 

A.  At  that  time  I  had  the  whole  pro 
gramme  of  the  uprising  of  the  order,  and 
every  thing  they  were  to  do  respecting  tho 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


23 


seizing  of  the  United  States  arsenals,  the 
liberation  of  the  rebel  prisoners,  and  the 
concentrating  of  the  members  of  the  order. 

Q.  From  whom  did  you  get  this  pro 
gramme  ? 

A.  From  Mr.  Dodd. 

Q.   Was  it  given  to  you  in  writing  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  it  was  given  verbally.  He 
pressed  upon  me  the  importance  of  secrecy, 
and  reduced  nothing  whatever  to  writing. 

Q.  Where  was  he  when  he  gave  you  this 
information  ? 

A.  At  his  business  place  in  this  city. 

Q.  Did  any  one  else  hear  the  conversation  ? 

A.  There  were  others  in  the  room,  but  no 
one  else  heard  the  conversation  ? 

Q.  How  was  it  that  you  came  to  be  in  this 
city? 

A.  There  was  to  be  a  meeting  in  Chicago 
on  the  20th  day  of  July,  and  Judge  Bullitt 
left  Louisville  in  time  to  be  here.  He  was 
expected  back  in  five  days  from  a  meeting 
in  Chicago.  Dodd  had  been  to  New  York. 
I  came  to  Indianapolis  on  no  particular 
business,  but  arrived  here  on  the  day  of 
Dodd's  return.  I  learned  from  him  that  the 
programme  had  all  been  decided  on.  He 
told  me  to  get  him  twenty  or  thirty  good 
runners.  They  were  to  notify  our  men  and 
have  them  ready  when  Judge  Bullitt  got 
back.  I  went  down  to  get  on  to  the  train, 
and  pretty  soon  I  saw  Bullitt  come  on  board. 
He  looked  as  though  he  had  been  traveling, 
and  he  told  me  that  he  had  just  come  to 
town  on  the  Bellefontaine  train.  We  went 
into  the  cars,  and  he  told  me  that  the  pro 
gramme  was  all  arranged.  We  talked  only 
a  few  minutes,  and  did  not  get  together 
again  during  the  ride.  We  kept  apart  for 
prudential  reasons.  In  the  evening,  when 
he  got  to  Jeflersonville,  Indiana,  he  hired  a 
buggy,  and  I  was  to  take  him  across  the 
river.  He  did  not  want  to  go  through  the 
town.  He  did  not  wish  his  acquaintances 
to  know  that  he  was  there.  He  gave  me 
the  names  of  A.  0.  Brannan  and  Dr.  Bay- 
less,  to  send  them  to  his  house,  to  whom  he 
would  impart  this  programme,  and  next 
morning  I  was  to  send  to  Dr.  Kalfus  and 
Mr.  W.  B.  Thomas;  and  then  he  said  he  did 
not  care  much  if  he  was  arrested.  These 
men,  he  said,  could  carry  on  the  organiza 
tion,  and  in  the  uprising  they  could  release 
him.  Mr.  Thomas  was  the  jailor  in  Louis 
ville.  Immediately  on  the  landing  of  the 
boat  at  the  Louisville  side,  he  was  arrested, 
and  taken  to  Colonel  Farleigh's  headquar 
ters.* 

Q.  How  did  that  arrest  occur  ? 

A.  It  was  caused  by  an  order  from  this 
city.  The  order  said  Judge  Bullitt  would 
be  down  on  the  train  that  day,  and  that  he 
was  to  be  arrested  immediately  on  his  arri 
val  there. 

*  Judge  TJullitt,  on  his  arrest,  was  sent  to  Fort  Lafay- 
fft* 


Q.  Did  he  have  an  interview  with  the  four 
men  named? 

A.  No,  sir :  he  did  not  get  to  see  them. 

Q.  Did  these  men  belong  to  the  order? 

A.  Dr.  Kalfus  and  Mr.  Thomas  were  mem 
bers  of  the  order.  The  other  two  I  did  not 
see. 

Q.  How  do  you  know  they  were  members 
of  the  order  ? 

A.  By  having  met  Thomas  in  the  Grand 
Council,  and  from  Dr.  Kalfus  giving  me  the 
signs  and  secrets,  and  from  seeing  him  give 
them  to  others.* 

Q.  State,  as  nearly  as  you  can,  what  was 
the  plan  that  Mr.  Dodd  and  Dr.  Bowles  in 
formed  you  had  been  arranged  at  the  meet 
ing  in  Chicago,  and  who  were  the  leaders. 

A.  I  was  sent  back  here  on  Monday  night 
by  Kalfus  and  Thomas,  Bullitt  being  ar 
rested.  I  told  them  of  Bullitt's  arrest,  and 
mentioned  the  programme  to  them  that 
Bullitt  had  spoken  of — that  two  gentlemen 
should  be  sent  out  there  on  Saturday,  and 
two  on  Sunday,  that  Bullitt  might  impart 
to  them  the  programme.  Bullitt  did  not 
impart  it  to  me,  and  did  not  intend  to. 
Kalfus  made  arrangements  with  Dr.  Helm, 
who  said  he  was  personally  acquainted  with 
Mr.  Dodd,  that  he  was  to  come  up  here  if 
he  could,  but  as  he  did  not  come  up,  they 
directed  me  to  come  here  on  Monday  night 
Kalfus  and  Thomas  approved  of  this  order, 
and  sent  me  here  to  learn  from  Dodd  the 
arrangement  and  plan  agreed  upon  at  Chi 
cago.  I  came  here  and  told  Dodd  of  Bul 
litt's  arrest.  He  asked  me  if  Bullitt  was 
searched.  I  said  not.  He  appeared  very 
much  excited,  and  said  he  hoped  they 
treated  him  like  a  gentleman,  and  not 
search  him;  that  he  had  drafts  on  Montreal 
for  money.  He  said  he  told  Bullitt,  when 
he  left  Chicago,  that  he  had  better  not  go 
to  Canada;  that  it  would  create  suspicion, 
and  that  he  might  have  known  he  would 
be  arrested.  Mr.  Dodd  was  so  much  excited 
that  he  gritted  his  teeth. 

Q.  Where  was  it  you  saw  Dodd,  when  you 
informed  him  of  Bullitt's  arrest? 

A.  It  was  in  Dodd's  office,  at  his  business 
house  in  this  city,  about  nine  o'clock  in  the 
morning.  It  was  Tuesday,  and  about  the 
last  of  July.  I  have  a  memorandum  by 
which  I  can  fix  the  date ;  it  is  the  report  1 
made  to  General  Carrington  at  the  time. 

Q.  You  may  produce  the  memorandum. 

A.  I  have  not  the  report  made  at  that 
time.  I  gave  it  to  General  Carrington  in 
person.  It  was  on  Tuesday ;  either  the  last 
Tuesday  in  July,  or  the  first  Tuesday  in 
August. 

Q.  State  what  Dodd  told  you  was  the 
plan  agreed  on  at  Chicago. 

A.  Dodd  said  they  had  agreed  to  seize 
the  camps  of  rebel  prisoners  here — Camp 

*Mr.  Stidger,  during  a  portion  of  the  time  ho  wai 
United  States  Detective,  was  a  "student  of  medicine" 
in  the  office  of  Dr.  Kalfua,  Louisville, 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


Morton ;  Camp  Chase,  in  Ohio ;  Camp  Doug 
las,  at  Chicago,  and  the  Depot  of  Prison 
ers,  at  Johnson's  Island.  They  were  going 
to  seize  the  arsenals  here,  and  at  Spring 
field  and  Chicago,  Illinois.  They  were 
going  to  arm  these  prisoners  with  the  arms 
thus  seized;  raise  all  the  members  of  the 
order  they  could,  and  arm  them,  and  organ 
ize  as  many  men  as  they  could  on  the  15th 
or  16th  of  August;  for  that  was  fixed  as  the 
day  of  the  uprising.  Each  commander  was 
to  move  all  his  men  toward,  and  concen 
trate  them  in,  Louisville.  They  were  to  get 
the  co-operation  of  Colonel  Syphert  and 
Colonel  Jesse,  of  the  rebel  army,  who  were 
then  in  Kentucky,  and  who  were  to  seize 
Louisville,  and  hold  it  until  their  forces 
could  co-operate.  They  were  to  seize  Lou 
isville  and  Jefferson ville  and  New  Albany, 
and  the  rebels  were  to  hold  them  until 
these  forces  could  come  to  Louisville  to 
assist  in  holding  these  places. 

Q.  Was  there  any  difference  of  opinion 
at  Chicago  as  to  the  course  to  be  taken? 

A.  At  Chicago  there  was  a  difference 
about  whether  they  were  to  wait  until  after 
they  were  sure  of  the  co-operation  of  rebel 
forces,  or  go  ahead  without  waiting  for  the 
rebels. 

Q.  How  was  the  matter  finally  fixed? 

A.  Dodd  sent  Harrison  to  see  Milligan, 
Humphreys,  and  Walker,  and  get  them  here 
before  that  day.  They  did  not  come.  Dodd 
read  me  letters  from  them,  which  were  not 
signed,  but  which,  he  said,  were  from  them. 
They  said  they  were  to  go  ahead  at  the 
time  designated  to  release  and  arm.  the 
prisoners  and  members  of  the  order,  and 
eventually  to  unite  at  Louisville.  Harrison 
was  a  messenger  who  went  to  see  these  men, 
and  have  them  come  here.  I  left  on  Sat 
urday.  He  did  not  send  to  Walker,  for  he 
was  in  New  York,  and  expected  to  be  here 
that  week.  He  also  sent  a  messenger  to 
Dr.  Bowles. 

Q.  From  whom  did  Dodd  read  letters  to 
you? 

A.  He  read  letters  purporting  to  come 
from  Milligan  and  Humphreys;  but  I  am 
not  sure  whether  there  was  one  from  Dr. 
Bowles  or  not. 

Q.  Did  you  see  the  signatures  or  hand 
writing? 

A.  I  saw  the  handwriting. 

Q.  Did  you  recognize  it? 

A.  I  did  not. 

Q,  If  Dodd  told  you  who  were  at  Chicago, 
state  who  they  were? 

A.  I  did  not  learn  of  any  one  being  there 
but  Judge  Bullitt,  Dr.JBowles,  Dick  Barrett 
[afterward  corrected  to  James  A.  Barrett], 
Dodd,  and  Walker. 

Q.  How  did  you  learn  that  they  were  there? 

A.  From  Dodd.  He  told  me  they  were 
there.  He  arranged  this  plan.  There  were 
other  persons  there  from  Illinois  and  from 
this  State. 


Q.  What  day  did  they  meet  at  Chicago? 

A.  The  meeting  was  to  have  been  on  the 
20th  of  July,  and  was  called  about  that 
time. 

Q.  Was  it  first  arranged  to  have  a  meet 
ing  earlier  than  that? 

A.  It  was  first  arranged  to  have  a  meet 
ing  of  the  Supreme  Council  of  the  Order 
on  the  first  day  of  July. 

Q.  Why  did  that  meeting  not  take  place  ? 

A.  It  was  postponed  on  account  of  the 
postponement  of  the  National  Democratic 
Convention. 

Q.  Did  it  take  place  on  the  20th  of  July? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  from  Dodd  what  rank 
these  men  had  in  the  order? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  rank  did  Dodd  hold  in  the 
order? 

A.  He  was  Grand  Commander  of  the 
State  of  Indiana, 

Q.  What  rank  did  Bowles  have  in  the 
order  ? 

A.  Major  General  of  the  order,  command 
ing  one  of  the  districts  of  the  State. 

Q.  What  rank  did  David  T.  Yeakle  hold? 

A.  He  had  held  the  same  rank  as  Bowles; 
but  was  thrown  out  on  the  14th  day  of 
June,  and  Walker  elected  in  his  place. 

Q.  What  rank  did  Milligan  hold? 

A.  The  same  as  Bowles. 

Q.  What  rank  did  Walker  hold? 

A.  The  same  as  Bowles. 

Q.  What  was  the  rank  of  J.  F.  Bullitt  ? 

A.  Grand  Commander  of  the  State  of 
Kentucky. 

Q.  How  do  the  Grand  Commanders  rank 
in  the  order,  compared  with  Major  Generals? 

A.  Grand  Commanders  rank  over  Major 
Generals.  ' 

Q.  Who  composed  the  meeting  at  Chi 
cago? 

A.  They  were  Major  Generals  and  Grand 
Commanders  of  the  order. 

Q.  What  day  was  set  for  the  uprising  to 
take  place? 

A.  The  first  time  was  set  in  Illinois,  which 
was  to  be  the  3d  or  17th  of  August.  Dodd 
told  me  at  the  last  meeting,  the  15th  or 
16th  was  the  day  set. 

Q.  Why  do  you  say  it  was  on  the  3d  or 
the  17th  of  August? 

A.  That  was  the  day  given  me  by  Piper, 
of  Springfield.  The  day  was  to  be  as  Yal- 
landigham  chose.  That  is  what  Piper  told 
me. 

Q.  Who  is  Piper? 

A.  He  said  he  had  an  appointment  on 
Vallandigham's  staff. 

Q.  What  is  Vallandigham's  rank  in  the 
Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty? 

A.  Supreme  Commander  of  the  "United 
States. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  if  his  orders  were  to  be 
supreme — above  all  other  orders  or  laws? 

A,  I  learned  from  mecAers  of  the  order, 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


25 


that  his  orders  were  to  be  obeyed  above  all 
other  orders,  and  the  books  of  the  order 
taught  as  much. 

Q.  Did  you  meet  Piper  as  a  member  of 
the  order? 

A.  I  met  him  in  the  Grand  Council  of 
the  State  of  Kentucky. 

Q.  Was  the  time  of  this  uprising  to  be  as 
Vallandigham  should  determine? 

A.  That  was  the  first  programme.  The 
day  had  been  set  from  the  3d  to  the  17th, 
and  if  they  were  sufficiently  ready,  he  was 
to  decide  on  which  day  they  should  rise. 

Q.  Where  was  this  uprising  to  be? 

A.  It  was  to  be  general  in  Ohio,  Indiana, 
Illinois,  Missouri,  and  as  much  of  Kentucky 
as  could  be  worked. 

Q.  Did  you  know  of  Dodd,  or  any  mem 
bers  of  the  order,  taking  steps  to  commu 
nicate  to  rebels  any  thing  about  the  order  ? 

A.  I  know  of  members  of  the  order  do 
ing  so.  A  rebel  colonel  was  given  the 
secrets  of  the  order,  and  requested  to  dis 
seminate  them  at  the  South.  Judge  Bullitt 
admitted  to  me  that  he  had  tried  to  have 
a  conference  with  Colonel  Jesse. 

Q.  Who  else  did  he  communicate  with? 

A.  He  also  sent  a  man  to  have  a  confer 
ence  with  Colonel  Syphert,  of  the  rebel 
army,  to  ascertain  when  he  could  best  co 
operate  with  him,  or  whether  he  could  use 
his  forces  in  the  capture  of  Louisville. 

Q.  With  what  forces  did  Bullitt  propose 
to  co-operate  with  him? 

A.  lie  proposed  to  co-operate  with  the 
forces  in  this  order. 

Q.  Was  any  rebel  colonel  initiated  into 
this  order,  and  given  particular  instruc 
tions? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  and  where? 

A.  In  the  city  of  Louisville,  in  July; 
about  the  last  of  July. 

Q,  How  did  he  happen  to  be  in  Louis 
ville? 

A.  He  was  there  on  parole.  He  tried  to 
get  the  military  authorities  to  banish  him 
to  Canada;  and  he  told  me  that  he  would 
then  go  South,  and  take  up  arms  again ;  and 
if  they  did  not  banish  him  to  Canada,  he 
said  he  would  go  to  Canada  any  way.  From 
there  he  would  go  to  Mexico,  and  take  the 
oath  of  allegiance  to  the  Mexican  Govern 
ment,  which  would  release  him  from  his 
oath  to  the  United  States  Government.  He 
would  then  come  back  to  the  South  and 
take  up  arms  again  for  the  Confederacy.  I 
so  reported  to  Colonel  Farleigh.  and  the 
papers  were  not  given  him.  He  did  go  to 
Canada.  I  saw  a  letter  afterward  from  him 
at  Winchester.  He  sent  back  for  the  rit 
ual  and  the  unwritten  work  of  the  order, 
which  was  to  be  written  in  secret  cypher 
and  sent  to  him. 

Q.  Did  he  get  it? 

A.  He  did  not,  because  the  military 
authorities  hacLseen  the  letter  before  .the 


officer  to  whom  it  was  written  got  it,  or  had 
an  opportunity  of  seeing  it. 

Q.  State  whether  in  any  of  the  meetings 
of  these  lodges  of  which  Mr.  Dodd  was  a 
member,  and  at  which  he  was  present,  he 
there  used  any  language,  or  performed  any 
acts  which  denied  the  authority  of  the  Gen 
eral  Government  to  suppress  the  rebellion 
by  force  of  arms.  If  so,  what? 

A.  He  used  language  which  strongly  de 
nied  that  power  to  the  Government.  There 
were  no  acts  performed  to  my  knowledge, 
except  what  I  have  already  detailed. 

Q.  Was  there  any  such  language  used  as 
that  this  Government  was  a  usurpation,  and 
ought  to  be  set  aside  ? 

A.  The  word  usurpation  was  used.  Also 
the  statement  that  this  Government  was  a 
"  tyrannical  usurpation,"  was  used  in  the 
meeting  that  day. 

Q.  Was  it  said  that  the  Government 
should  be  resisted  because  it  was  a  usurpa 
tion? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Was  the  doctrine  inculcated  that  they 
were  to  resist  the  draft  ? 

A.  It  was  noi. 

Q.  Was  it  inculcated,  as  a  general  doc 
trine,  that  they  were  to  oppose  coercion  on 
the  part  of  the  Government  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  they,  in  this  order,  say  that  force 
might  yet  be  of  use,  on  the  principle  of 
overthrowing  this  Government,  and  estab 
lishing  independent  republics  or  govern 
ments  within  the  States  now  belonging  to 
the  United  States  ? 

A.  Their  design  was  to  carry  a  portion  of 
the  States  now  composing  the  United  States 
into  the  Southern  Confederacy. 

Q.  Was  any  thing  said  about  establishing 
a  North-western  Confederacy? 

A.  Not  in  their  lodges.  It  was  discussed 
by  Dr.  Bowles  himself,  privately. 

Q.  What  was  the  general  purpose  of  the 
order  ? 

A.  Its  general  purpose  was  to  assist  the 
rebellion. 

Q.  You  may  state  whether,  at  the  first 
meeting  on  the  14th  of  June,  any  address 
was  made  by  Dodd  to  the  order.  If  so, 
what  it  was. 

A.  He  made  no  remarks  except  about  the 
purpose  of  the  meeting. 

Q.  Was  there  any  written  address  deliv 
ered  by  him  ? 

A.  The  address,  which  is  printed  as  that 
of  the  Grand  Commander,  was  made  in 
February.  I  was  given  copies  of  it,  and 
was  told  Dodd  was  Grand  Commander  at 
that  time. 

The  Judge  Advocate  here  handed  the 
•witness  a  pamphlet  containing  an  address 
by  the  Grand  Commander  to  the  Grand 
Council  of  the  State  of  Indiana,  and  asked : 
Is  that  one  of  the  addresses. 

A.  The  address  in  this  pamphlet  is  Dodd's. 


26 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


The  pamphlet  is  the  proceedings  of  the 
Grand  Council  of  the  State  of  Indiana,  at  a 
session  held  the  16th  and  17th  of  February, 
1864.  The  first  time  I  was  here,  one  of 
them  was  given  me  to  give  to  Judg^  Bullitt, 
and  which  I  gave  to  him.  It  was  about  the 
5th  of  June. 

Q.  Who  gave  it  to  you  ? 

A.  It  was  given  to  me  by  Mr.  Harrison. 
All  the  books  of  the  order  I  ever  received 
were  given  me  by  Harrison. 

A  pamphlet,  entitled  "  Proceedings  of  the 
Grand  Council,"  etc.,  was  here  introduced 
in  evidence  by  the  Judge  Advocate. 

The  Judge  Advocate  here  read  extracts 
from  the  address  referred  to,  that  "Lin 
coln's  Government  was  a  usurpation,"  etc. 
He  then  passed  to  the  witness  a  number  of 
pamphlets,  from  which  he  requested  him  to 
select  and  specify  to  the  Commission  the 
ritual,  constitution,  by-laws,  etc.,  of  the  Sons 
of  Liberty,  and  state  how  he  knew  them  to 
be  such. 

A.  These  pamphlets  contain  the  obliga 
tions  of  the  Vestibule  and  other  obligations 
of  the  Order  of  American  Knights,  and  the 
ritual  of  the  Order  of  American  Knights, 
which  has  now  given  way  to  the  Order  of 
the  Sons  of  Liberty.  This  order  was  ex 
posed,  and  they  made  some  slight  changes 
in  the  ritual,  and  called  it  the  Order  of 
Sons  of  Liberty.  These  books  contain 
three  parts  of  the  ritual.  They  contain 
what  is  known  as  the  ritual  and  proper 
work  of  the  order  given  in  all  the  lodges. 

The  pamphlets  containing  the  ritual  and 
obligations  of  the  order  "0.  A.  K.,"  were 
here  introduced  in  evidence  by  the  Judge 
Advocate. 

Q.  Do  you  recognize  that  pamphlet,  enti 
tled  "S.  L.,"  as  the  ritual  of  the  first  de 
gree? 

A.  This  book  contains  what  is  known  as 
the  Vestibule,  or  First  Temple  degree  of 
the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty. 

The  pamphlet,  entitled  "S.  L.,"  was  here 
introduced  in  evidence  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate. 

Q.  Do  you  recognize  the  pamphlet  enti 
tled  "I."  "K.  O.  S.  L.,"  as  the  ritual  of  the 
second  degree? 

A.  That  book  contains  the  second  and 
third  degrees  of  the  order.  They  are  known 
as  the  conclave  degrees,  or  second  and  third 
degrees  of  the  order,  which  are  given  men 
initiated  into  the  county  temples.  Respon 
sible  men  are  given  the  three  degrees  con 
tained  in  these  books,  and  in  each  voting 
precinct  of  a  county  where  there  is  a  county 
temple,  branch  temples  are  organized,  in 
which  the  Vestibule  and  first  degrees  are 
given,  but  the  members  are  not  given  all 
the  degrees  of  the  order.  Influential  men 
are  given  the  three  degrees. 

The  pamphlet,  entitled  "  I."  "  K.  0.  S.  L.," 
was  here  introduced  by  the  Judge  Advocate 
in  evidence. 


Q.  What  is  the  specific  difference  between 
the  three  degrees  ? 

A.  In  the  books,  there  is  no  particular  dis 
tinction.  The  members  are  as  much  bound 
in  the  first  as  in  the  second  or  third  de 
gree.  More  trust  is  reposed  in  the  mem 
bers  of  the  second  and  third  degrees,  and 
they  are  given  more  of  the  secrets  and  ulti 
mate  designs  of  the  order. 

Q.  Are  any  but  members  of  the  second 
and  third  degrees  permitted  to  attend 
meetings  of  the  Grand  Council? 

A.  If  any  delegates  are  elected,  who  are 
not  members  of  those  degrees,  they  are 
given  the  second  and  third  degrees  at  the 
session  of  the  Grand  Council — if  they  are 
not  given  in  the  county  temple. 

Q.  Was  the  plan  for 'the  attack  upon  the 
arsenals  and  the  camps  of  prisoners,  im 
parted  to  any  but  third  degree  members? 

A.  It  might  have  been  imparted  to  other 
members  whom  they  had  confidence  in. 

Q.  Do  you  recognize  the  pamphlet  enti 
tled  "General  Laws  of  the  S.  L."  as  per 
taining  to  the  order? 

A.  This  pamphlet  is  the  constitution  of 
the  county  temple;  which  governs  the 
workings  of  the  county  temples,  and  is 
regulated  by  the  State  Council. 

The  pamphlet,  entitled  "General  Laws 
of  the  S.  L.,"  was  here  introduced  in  evi 
dence,  by  the  Judge  Advocate. 

Q.  Do  you  recognize  the  pamphlet,  enti 
tled  "Constitution  of  the  Grand  Council 
of  S.  L.  of  Indiana,"  as  pertaining  to  the 
order? 

A.  That  is  the  Constitution  of  the  State 
Council  of  Indiana,  made  by  the  State 
Council.  Each  State  Council  of  the  order 
makes  its  own  constitution  in  accordance 
with  its  own  views,  but  it  must  not,  in  any 
particular,  be  in  violation  of  the  Consti 
tution  of  the  Supreme  Council  of  all  the 
I  States. 

The  pamphlet,  entitled  "Constitution  of 
the  Grand  Council  of  S.  L.  of  Indiana," 
was  here  introduced  in  evidence  by  the 
Judge  Advocate. 

Q.  Do  y_ou  recogni/e  the  pamphlet,  enti 
tled  "Constitution  and  Laws  of  the  S. 
G.  C.,"  as  pertaining  to  the  order? 

A.  This  pamphlet  is  the  Constitution  of 
the  Supreme  Council  of  all  the  States. 

The  pamphlet,  entitled  "Constitution 
and  Laws  of  the  S.  G.  C.,"  was  here  intro 
duced  in  evidence  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate. 

The  Judge  Advocate  here  handed  the 
witness  a  book  entitled  "Roll  of  Prisoners," 
and  asked: 

Q.  Do  you  recognize  that  book?  * 

A.  Harrison  had  a  series  of  these  books, 
which  he  showed  to  me  and  explained  the 


*  A  small  account  book,  containing  a  list  of  the  mem 
bers  of  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty,  in  Indianapo 
lis;  also  lists  of  several  companies  of  rebel  prisoners, 
confined  in  Camp  Morton. 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


27 


manner  of  keeping  them.  He  told  me  all 
the  names  in  this  list,  (witness  pointing  out 
the  lipt  of  names,  with  numbers  "1"  and  "3:| 
opposite  in  parallel  column)  were  those  of 
members  of  the  order.  Those  numbered 
"1"  al  that  time  had  taken  the  first 
degree,  and  those  marked  U3"  had  taken 
the  third  degree.  HJB  had  a  number  of 
other  books  in  which  he  kept  the  accounts 
with  the  county  temples — the  amount 
they  had  paid  in  for  organization  fees,  for 
books,  for  regular  monthly  dues,  and  for 
annual  dues.  They  also  gave  the  names  of 
the  officers  of  all  the  county  temples  which 
had  reported  to  him,  the  amount  due  from 
them,  the  amounts  paid,  and  what  for.  I 
have  seen  this  book  before.  It  was  kept 
by  Harrison,  and  contained  the  names  of 
the  members  of  the  order  here. 

The  book  entitled  the  ''Roll  of  Prison 
ers,"  was  here  introduced  in  evidence  by 
the  Judge  Advocate. 

Q.  Does  that  book  contain  the  names  of 
officers  of  the  county  temples? 

A.  Harrison  had  other  books  which  con 
tained  the  names  of  officers  of  the  county 
temples. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Wednesday,  September  28,  at  eight 
o  clock. 


COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,        ) 
September  28,  18t>4,  8  o'clock,  A.  M.j 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  ad 
journment. 

All  the  members  present;  also  the  Judge 
Advocate,  the  accused,  and  his  counsel. 

The  proceedings  of  yesterday  were  read 
and  approved. 

Felix  G.  Stidger,  a  witness  for  the  Govern 
ment,  then  proceeded  with  his  testimony, 
as  follows: 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate.  State 
to  the  Commission  what  interviews  you 
had  with  Mr.  Dodd  at  his  house,  or  other 
wise. 

A.  I  was  at  Mr.  Dodd's  house  twice,  but 
only  saw  him  there  once.  It  was  on  a  Fri 
day  night.  Mr.  Harrison  was  there  also, 
and  in  speaking  of  the  uprising  of  the 
Sons  of  Liberty,  said  something  about  their 
being  rather  dilatory.  It  appeared  they 
had  not  enough  arms  to  be  of  service.  Mr. 
Dodd  remarked,  that  if  they  did  not  rise 
he  would  leave  the  country,  for  he  would 
be  damned  if  he  would  live  under  such  a 
Government  as  the  present  Administra 
tion. 

Q.  Was  or  was  not  that  in  the  contin 
gency  of  the  order  not  rising  to  destroy 
the  present  Administration? 

A.   It  was. 

Q.  About  what  date  was  that? 

A.  That  was  on  the  Friday  night  before 
Judge  Bullitt  was  arrested  on  the  Satur 
day.  It  was  probably  the  last  Friday  in 


July,  though  I  will  not  be  sure.  Mr.  Har 
rison,  Grand  Secretary  of  the  State  of  In 
diana,  was  present  at  the  convention. 

Q.  Was  any  plan  determined  upon  at  the 
meeting  of  the  order  on  the  14th  of  June, 
as  to  the  manner  of  disposing  of  Mr.  Coffin, 
and  how  it  was  to  be  brought  about? 

A.  Mr.  Dodd  expected  to  find  him  at 
Hamilton,  Ohio,  the  next  day,  pick  a  quar 
rel  with  him,  if  possible,  and  shoot  him. 

Q.  How  do  you  know  that? 

A.  Dodd  so  expressed  it  at  that  meeting. 

The  roll  of  the  members  of  the  order  forln- 
dianapolis  was  here  handed  to  the  witness. 

Q.  Please  to  look  at  that  roll,  and  designate 
any  of  the  names  you  know  belonging  to 
the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty. 

A.  W.  M.  Harrison,  H.  II.  Dodd,  Joseph 
Ristine.  I  conversed  with  him  on  the  sub 
ject  of  the  order,  but  never  met  him  at  any 
lodge. 

Q.  Did  he  display  any  knowledge  that  he 
could  not  have  acquired  outside  the  lodge 
of  the  order? 

A.  He  did. 

Q.  Who  is  Joseph  Ristine? 

A.  Auditor  of  the  State.  I  have  seen 
him  in  his  office. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  the  purport  of  any 
conversation  you  have  had  with  him  ? 

A.  I  do  not  recollect  any,  except  some 
thing  that  was  said  about  a  letter  which 
was  supposed,  at  the  time,  to  have  been 
written  by  Dick  Bright. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  objected  to 
the  witness  relating  any  conversation  of  Mr. 
Ristine,  as  it  had  not  been  shown  that  he 
was  a  member  of  the  order,  the  witness 
having  said  that  he  never  saw  him  at  any 
lodge  of  the  order. 

The  Judge  Advocate,  in  reply,  said  that  it 
had  been  proved  that  the  book  or  roll  in 
question  was  kept  by  an  officer  of  this  se 
cret  society;  the  witness  also  testified  that 
the  names  on  the  roll  were  members  of 
the  order.  The  evidence,  therefore,  fur 
nished  by  the  book  was  more  reliable  than 
if  Stidger,  the  witness,  had  seen  Ristine  at 
the  lodge. 

The  Court  was  then  cleared  for  delibera 
tion.  On  being  re-opened,  the  Judge  Advo 
cate  announced  to  the  accused  that  the  ob 
jection  was  overruled. 

Answer  of  the  witness  continued: 

The  conversation  was  in  relation  to  a  let 
ter  written  to  Dodd,  Bowles  and  Ristine, 
and  signed  "Dick,"  and  supposed  to  have 
been  written  by  Dick  Bright.  The  letter 
was  a  warning  against  Coffin  as  a  United 
States  Detective;  that  he  was  watching 
them,  and  reporting  every  thing  they  did. 
I  was  kept  at  Ristine's  office  nearly  all  day, 
for  young  Ristine  to  point  Coffin  out  to  me, 
in  case  he  should  pass  the  office. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  meet  in  the  Grand  Coun« 
cil,  persons  from  other  parts  of  the  country, 
besides  those  here  named? 


28 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


A.  I  have.  There  was  an  old  gentleman 
by  the  name  of  Oty,  Dr.  Lemans,  a  Judge 
Borten,  from  Allen  county.  He  was  a  large, 
fleshy  man.  A  Mr.  Everett,  of  Vanderberg 
county;  Mr.  Leech,  of  Burnt  District,  Union 
county;  Mr.  Myers,  of  Laporte  county,  and 
Mr.  A.  D.  Kaga  of  New  Amsterdam.  These 
were  some  I  became  acquainted  with  on  the 
14th  of  June. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  meet  in  any  of  their 
lodges,  or  as  a  member  of  the  order,  a  Mr. 
Lassalle? 

A.  I  do  not  think  I  met  him.  On  the 
14th  of  June,  he  was  elected  a  member  of 
the  Supreme  Council  of  the  United  States. 
Mr.  Lassalle  resides  in  Cass  county. 

Q.  State  who  else  was  elected  that  day  ? 

A.  John  G.  Davis. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  meet  a  Mr.  Heffren  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  I  met  him  in  Salem,  Indiana, 
twice. 

Q.  Was  he  a  member  of  the  order? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  he  was.  He  was  recognized 
as  such.  I  was  told  by  the  order  that  he 
was  Deputy  Grand  Commander  of  the  State 
of  Indiana.  His  name  was  called  on  that 
day,  but  he  was  not  present.  He  was  for 
merly  a  Lieutenant  Colonel  of  an  Indiana 
regiment.  He  told  me  himself  that  he  and 
Dodd  had  a  right  to  call  the  order  together 
at  any  time  they  might  think  proper. 

Q.  Did  he  ever  explain,  in  detail,  the  na 
ture  and  object  of  the  organization? 

A.  He  told  me  that  they  were  to  co-ope 
rate  with  the  Confederate  forces.  The  first 
time  I  saw  him,  he  supposed  I  was  a  Com 
missioner,  sent  by  the  Confederate  forces. 
I  saw  him  in  Salern,  Indiana,  on  the  6th 
day  of  May. 

Q.  How  are  you  able  to  fix  that  date  ? 

A.  By  its  being  the  first  day  I  left  Louis 
ville  to  join  Bowles. 

Q.  Did  you  know  Heffren  before? 

A.  I  never  saw  him  before.  There  was  a 
man  there  by  the  name  of  John  Drom, 
who  pointed  him  out  to  me;  he  is  a  clothier. 
He  took  Heffren  out  and  told  him  that  I 
was  from  Kentucky.  This  man  told  me 
that  Heffren  was  one  of  the  leaders  of  the 
order.  Heffren  then  came  to  me,  suppos 
ing  I  was  a  Commissioner  sent  to  him  from 
the  rebel  force. 

Q,  Did  he  approach  you  as  a  member  of 
the  order,  making  any  signs? 

A.  No,  sir,  he  did  not.  When  he  first  ap 
proached  me,  he  asked  if  I  came  on  that  bu 
siness.  I  told  him  I  did  not.  I  then  men 
tioned  to  him  about  some  regiments  of  For 
rest's  being  disbanded  in  Kentucky.  He 
said  he  knew  it,  and  that  they  were  to  have 
four  more,  who  were  to  remain  at  home  for 
a  time  and  to  concentrate  when  neces 
sary. 

Q.  For  what  purpose  were  they  disband 
ed? 

A.  He  did  not  tell  me  for  what  particu 
lar  purpose,  but,  he  said,  he  was  expecting  a 


commissioner  from  three  of  those  regiments, 
and  he  thought  I  was  the  person. 

Q.  What  was  that  commissioner  to  ar 
range  with  him? 

A.  I  do  not  know,  sir. 

Q.  What  else  was  said? 

A.  I  do  not  remember  any  thing  particu 
lar.  A  gentleman  on  the  street  asked  him 
why  a  certain  lady  was  sent  to  Salem,  Indi 
ana,  and  he  said  they  expected  trouble  in 
Kentucky  very  soon,  and  it  would  be  safer 
in  Salem  than  it  would  be  in  Kentucky. 

Q.  Did  Heftren  inform  you  then  that 
this  organization  was  for  the  purpose  of 
co-operating  with  the  rebels? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  he  did. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  meet  at  Louisville  a  man 
by  the  name  of  Piper,  that  you  say  was  on 
Vallandigham's  staff;  if  so,  was  he  a  mem 
ber  of  the  order  ? 

A.  Yes  sir.  I  met  him  there,  and  he  was 
a  member  of  this  order.  He  told  me  he 
resided  in  Springfield,  Illinois.  I  do  not 
know  his  first  name. 

Q.  What  was  he  at  Louisville  for? 

A.  He  had  been  traveling  in  the  eastern 
part  of  the  State,  initiating  men  into  the 
order.  He  was  present  at  the  meeting  of 
theGrand Council  in  Kentucky,  and  assisted 
in  opening  the  meeting. 

Q.  What  rank  did  he  claim  to  have  on 
Vallandigham's  staff? 

A.  He  told  me  he  was  on  his  staff,  but  he 
claimed  no  particular  appointment.  He 
told  me  that  James  A.  Barrett,  formerly  of 
St.  Louis,  now  of  Chicago,  was  Chief  of 
Staff  to  Vallandigham,  and  that  Captain 
Hines,  of  the  rebel  army,  who  also  was  on 
Vallandigham's  staff,  had  charge  of  the  re 
leasing  of  the  rebel  prisoners  on  John 
son's  Island. 

Q.  Was  this  the  man  you  referred  to  yes 
terday? 

A.  It  was,  and  by  mistake  I  gave  his 
name  as  Dick  Barrett.  It  was  James  A. 
Barrett  I  referred  to  in  my  testimony  yes 
terday.  Piper  said  he  had  a  communica 
tion  from  Vallandigham  and  Bowles,  giving 
him  charge  of  the  releasing  of  the  rebel 
prisoners  at  Rock  Island,  and  which  was  to 
be  effected  at  the  same  time. 

Q.  Where  was  Hines  at  that  time  ? 

A.  He  was  in  Canada,  waiting  for  the 
time  to  come.  Hines  was  the  same  man 
that  was  afterward  captured  with  Mor 
gan. 

Q.  Do  you  know  where  this  man  Piper  is 
now? 

A.  I  do  not. 

Q,  Did  you  learn  of  any  specific  action 
that  the  branch  of  the  order  in  Illinois  had 
resolved  upon,  in  case  Kentucky  should  re 
sist  the  enlistment  of  negroes? 

A.  Piper  told  me  that  he  had  attended  a 
meeting  of  the  Grand  Council  of  Illinois, 
land  that  they  had  passed  a  resolution, 
unanimously,  that  if  Kentucky  considered 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


29 


it  advisable  to  resist  the  enlistment  of  ne 
groes,  that  the  members  of  the  order  in 
Illinois  would  see  that  none  of  the  State 
Militia  or  Loyal  Leaguers,  as  they  were 
called,  should  be  allowed  to  be  sent  by  the 
Government  to  enforce  the  measure. 

A  shell  about  the  size  of  a  32-pounder, 
of  conical  shape,  was  here  handed  to  the 
witness.  The  butt  of  the  shell  being 
screwed  off,  showed  an  interior  shell,  which 
contained  an  iron  case  for  the  charge  of 
powder. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  seen  this  instrument 
before  ?  If  so,  state  where,  and  what  it  is. 

A.  I  saw  an  instrument  of  that  kind  at 
Booking's  room,  at  the  Louisville  Hotel, 
about  the  29th  or  30th  of  June.  'Bowles 
was  present,  also  Dr.  Kalfus  and  Charley 
Miller,  and  a  number  of  other  gentlemen. 
Booking  explained  it.  The  space  between 
the  innermost  case  and  the  inner  shell  was 
to  be  filled  with  liquid  Greek  fire.  The 
space  between  the  inner  and  outer  shell 
was  to  give  room  for  it  to  move,  so  as  to  ex 
plode  the  percussion  cap,  on  its  being 
thrown  and  striking  any  object. 

Q.  What  was  it  to  be  used  for? 

A.  It  was  contemplated  to  be  used  for 
the  destruction  of  Government  property. 

Q.  Is  this  the  same  thing  that  was  exhib 
ited  there  at  that  time? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  and  it  was  for  the  use  of  these 
conspirators. 

Q.  Was  any  thing  said  about  their  using 
such  an  instrument  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  they  said  it  was  just  such  a 
thing  as  they  wanted. 

A  spherical  shell  was  here  handed  to  the 
witness,  which  unscrewed  in  the  center  and 
showed  a  smaller  spherical  shell  inside. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  this  before? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  saw  it  at  Booking's  room; 
he  explained  the  working  of  it.  The  inner 
shell  was  to  be  filled  with  powder,  and  a 
cap  placed  on  each  of  the  nine  nipples 
to  be  seen  on  its  surface;  and  round 
a  glass  vial,  which  this  inner  shell  con 
tained,  was  placed  the  powder.  The  glass 
vial  contained  the  Greek  fire.  On  its  being 
thrown  against  any  object,  and  striking,  it 
would  explode  and  ignite  and  set  on  fire 
whatever  it  touched.  It  was  designed  to  be 
used  by  the  hand,  and  it  would  require 
Very  careful  handling  to  prevent  its  ex 
ploding,  as  the  least  blow  might  explode  it. 
Booking  mentioned  its  weight  and  proba 
ble  expense. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  that  this  instrument 
had  been  used  in  the  destruction  of  Gov 
ernment  property;  if  so,  state  when  and 
where. 

A.  I  was  told  by  Dr.  Bowles  that  the 
Greek  fire  had  been  used  for  the  destruc 
tion  of  Government  property.  Two  boats 
had  been  destroyed  at  Louisville,  in  the 
spring,  and  a  number  of  boats,  down  the 
river,  by  the  same  means,  in  April  or  May. 


I  am  not  sure  that  he  did  not  say  some 
boats  loaded  with  Government  stores  in  St. 
Louis.  Booking  explained  the  manner  in 
which  this  Greek  fire  could  be  used  outside 
of  the  shells.  It  might  be  kept  in  a  thin 
glass  vial,  and  when  you  wanted  to  destroy 
any  object,  all  you  had  to  do  was  to  throw 
the  glass  vial  against  it,  by  which  the  liquid 
would  be  scattered  about,  and  it  would  set 
or;  fire  every  thing  it  touched.  Booking 
said  it  might  be  made  so  as  to  ignite  in 
stantly  it  was  scattered,  or  some  time  after 
ward.  Bowles  said  it  might  be  arranged 
with  the  clock  contrivance,  to  take  fire 
some  hours  afterward. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  of  the  change  of  the 
name  of  this  order  from  American  Knights 
to  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty;  if  so, 
state  what  time  that  change  was  made  in 
the  different  States. 

A.  When  I  was  here,  I  saw  Dodd  the  first 
of  June;  he  told  me  that  Judge  Bullitt  and 
Dr.  Kalfus  had  gotten  some  new  works  of 
the  order.  He  told  me  that  the  order  had 
been  changed.  The  work  on  the  American 
Knights  had  been  distributed  over  the 
State,  and  he  wished  me  to  assist  in  distri 
buting  the  new  work.  I  had  seen  the  first 
degree  of  the  Order  of  American  Knights, 
but  had  never  read  it.  I  only  saw  what 
kind  of  a  looking  book  it  was. 

Q.  Was  this  a  new  order,  or  merely  a  con 
tinuation  of  the  old  one,  with  changes? 

A.  It  was  a  continuation  of  the  old  order, 
but  the  name  was  changed  to  the  Sons  of 
Liberty.  Those  of  the  Order  of  American 
Knights  were  not  admitted  into  the  Order 
of  the  Sons  of  Liberty,  unless  they  were 
considered  worthy. 

Q.  Do  you  know  any  thing  of  Dodd's  at 
tempt  to  extend  and  increase  this  order, 
by  disseminating  the  sentiments  of  the 
order? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  do  not  know  that  he  did  in 
this  State.  He  urged  the  extension  of  it 
in  Kentucky,  and  organizing  it  as  quickly 
and  as  thoroughly  as  possible. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  his  issuing  an  ad 
dress,  to  be  sent  to  the  different  members 
of  the  order? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  know  of  the  circulation  of 
the  address  exhibited  here  yesterday.  I 
know  there  were  some  of  them  given  to 
me  to  take  to  Kentucky,  and  1  saw  Harri 
son  give  some  of  them  to  persons,  whom 
he  told  me  were  members  of  the  order  in 
this  State. 

Q.  Was  it  inculcated  in  this  meeting  and 
elsewhere,  to  the  members  of  this  order, 
that  in  case  this  order  should  be  called 
nto  the  field,  its  members  were  to  obey  their 
chiefs,  and  that  their  orders  were  to  be  un 
questioned,  and  their  commands  supreme? 

A.  The  orders  of  the  chiefs  of  this  or 
ganization  were  to  be  above  all  orders,  and 
above  all  laws  of  the  United  States.  They 
were  to  pay  no  respect  to  the  orders  of  the 


30 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


civil  authorities,  or  orders  of  the  General 
Government,  but  were   instructed  that  the 
orders   of  their  chief  were  supreme. 
[Close  of  the  examination  in  chief.] 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

Became  a  member  of  the  Order  of  the 
Sons  of  Liberty  on  the  5th  of  May,  1864. 
Was  instructed  in  the  Vestibule  degree  by 
a  United  States  Detective.  Took  the  first 
degree,  in  the  city  of  Louisville,  about  the 
12th  of  May;  did  not  take  the  second  de 
gree  at  all,  and  was  instructed  in  the  third 
degree  by  Harrison,  the  Grand  Secretary 
of  Indiana,  in  Indianapolis,  about  the  1st 
of  June.  In  taking  these  degrees,  witness 
participated  as  a  bona  fide  member  of  the 
order;  but  acted  in  the  character  of  a  de 
tective  from  the  beginning.  Was  employed 
by  Captain  Stephen  E.  Jones,  of  Louisville, 
Provost  Marshal  of  the  District  of  Ken 
tucky,  at  witness'  request,  but  not  in  that 
particular  service.  Was  shown  a  letter, 
written  by  General  Carrington  to  Captain 
Jones,  requesting  him  to  send  a  Kentuckian 
to  Dr.  Bowles.  Witness  was  sent  in  accord 
ance  with  that  request.  Did  not  at  the 
time  know  of  the  existence  of  such  an 
order  as  the  Sons  of  Liberty.  Received  the 
Vestibule  degree  before  going  to  Dr.  Bowles. 
There  were  three  Temple  degrees  besides 
the  Vestibule  degree. 

The  meeting  at  Indianapolis,  on  the 
14th  of  June,  was  a  meeting  of  the  dele 
gates  of  county  temples  and  chiefs  of  the 
order.  Heard  the  roll  of  names  called;  but 
not  being  personally  acquainted  with  the 
members,  could  not  recall  them. 

Respecting  the  contemplated  assassina- 
ation  of  Coffin,  the  United  States  Detective, 
I  was  sent  from  Louisville  to  give  Dodd  and 
Bowles  the  opinion  of  Judge  Bullitt,  name 
ly  :  that  it  was  necessary  for  the  interests 
of  the  order  that  Coffin  should  be  put  out 
of  the  way.  The  matter  was  discussed  in 
Council.  Dodd  did  not  discountenance  the 
project;  but,  on  the  contrary,  considered  it 
necessary.  Was  taken  to  the  State  Au 
ditor's  office  by  Mr.  Dodd,  who  requested 
Mr.  Ristine's  son  to  show  him  Coffin  should 
he  pass.  Was  there,  off  and  on,  in  Mr. 
Ristine's  front  office  nearly  all  day.  About 
sundown  Coffin  was  pointed  out  to  him. 
Did  not  express  a  wish  to  meet  him  and 
kill  him;  the  words  used  were,  he  hoped 
to  meet  Coffin  hereafter  "  under  more  favor 
able  circumstances."  This  was  after  the 
Hamilton  meeting,  which  was  on  the  15th 
of  June,  the  day  after  the  meeting  of  the 
Council  in  Indianapolis.  Did  not,  in  that 
meeting,  insist  on  going  to  Hamilton,  in 
order  to  kill  Coffin:  did  not  speak  in  the 
Council  that  day.  Did  not  know  of  the 
Hamilton  meeting  till  it  was  brought  up  in 
the  Council.  Went  with  Dodd  and  Bowles 
to  the  meeting  at  Hamilton.  Was  appointed 
Grand  Secretary  of  the  order,  of  the  Grand 


Lodge  of  Kentucky,  by  Judge  Bullitt,  until 
an  election,  and  was  afterward  told  that  he 
had  been  elected  at  a  meeting  of  the  Grand 
Council.  Never  met  Mr.  Coffin  at  any 
meeting  of  the  Council,  nor  in  any  of  the 
lodges:  knew  he  was  a  United  States  De 
tective,  but  did  not  act  in  concert  with  him, 
nor  communicate  any  thing  to  him.  Be 
came  acquainted  with  Coffin  about  the  1st 
of  June.  The  pretense  of  not  knowing 
him  was  a  sham,  to  cover  up  ulterior  ob 
jects. 

Met  Dr.  Gatling  at  Mr.  Bingham's  office, 
when  he  (Stidger)  first  saw  Dodd.  Gatling 
was  at  the  Grand  Council,  and  was  present 
at  the  discussion  of  the  assassination  of  Cof 
fin.  Do  not  know  Mr.  Humphreys  person 
ally.  A  gentleman  they  said  was  Andrew 
Humphreys,  was  present  at  the  Council: 
he  was  a  fleshy  gentleman — fine-looking — 
about  forty  years  old.  Saw  Mr.  Milligan 
also  that  day,  for  the  first  time.  He  was  a 
tall,  bony,  tolerably  slender  man;  and  was 
an  active  participant  in  the  proceedings  of 
the  meeting.  He  was  there  morning  and 
evening.  A  man  by  the  name  of  Thomp 
son  was  there;  he  was  appointed  on  a  com 
mittee.  Mr.  McBride,  of  Evansville,  also 
was  present;  he  was  a  very  active  member, 
and  was  on  the  military  committee. 

Did  not  know  positively  that  the  order 
was  a  military  organization,  never  having 
seen  the  members  drill,  or  with  arms  in 
their  hands;  but  had  heard  members  of  the 
order  say  that  it  was  a  military  organiza 
tion.  The  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty 
extended  over  Ohio,  Kentucky,  Indiana, 
Illinois,  Missouri,  Wisconsin,  New  York, 
Pennsylvania,  Delaware  and  Maryland. 
From  the  North-eastern  States  they  ex 
pected  money,  but  not  men — those  States 
were  theoretically  organized,  as  far  as  the 
military  phase  was  concerned. 

Dodd  told  him  of  the  meeting  at  Chicago 
on  the  20th  of  July,  and  of  the  plan  of  ac 
tion  determined  on;  did  not  remember 
whether  Dodd  said  he  was  present  at  the 
meeting  or  not;  but  he  was  at  Chicago  at 
the  time.  In  speaking  of  the  meeting,  he 
used  the  words,  "We  came  to  such  and  such 
conclusions." 

In  conversations  with  members  of  the 
order,  he  learned  that  they  did  not  intend 
Indiana  and  Illinois  to  be  invaded  by  the 
rebels,  if  they  could  help  it.  The  war  was 
to  be  coniined  to  Kentucky  and  Missouri. 
Indiana  and  Ohio  were  to  co-operate  with 
Kentucky,  and  Illinois  with  Missouri.  The 
order  expected  the  co-operation  of  the  rebel 
forces,  and  were  to  rise  at  their  advance. 
The  order  was  to  organize  and  join  the 
rebel  forces  on  the  border.  The  point  set 
tled  on  was  Louisville. 

Dr.  Bowles  said  he  cared  nothing  about 
the  draft,  or  the  politics  of  the  Govern 
ment — he  said  they  were  engaged  in  a 
scheme  of  rebellion  against  the  Government 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


31 


of  the  United  States.  In  speaking  of  the 
movements  of  the  order,  Dodd  and  Bowles 
expressed  themselves  confident  of  success. 
Dr.  Athon,  of  this  city,  counseled  caution 
and  dolay,  till  they  were  more  thoroughly 
organized,  and  until  they  could  see  what 
could  be  done  at  the  polls.  He  was  present 
at  the  meeting  on  the  14th  of  June.  He 
also  said  they  should  use  their  military 
power  at  the  polls,  if  the  Government 
attempted  to  control  the  elections  by  bay 
onets;  and  that  there  would  be  a  time  when 
it  would  be  proper  to  use  their  military 
power  against  the  Government,  but  that 
time  had  not  yet  come.  lie  said  it  would 
not  be  changed  after  election;  that  an 
outbreak  would  come  after  the  election 
to  resist  the  Government,  both  as  to  its  po 
litical  and  military  policy.  The  usurpation 
of  the  Government,  such  as  the  suspension 
of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  freeing  of  the 
negroes,  and  the  general  tyrannical  acts  of 
the  Government,  they  deemed  sufficient  to 
warrant  military  operations  against  the 
Government.  Dr.  Athon  expressed  this 
opinion  to  witness,  in  his  office,  in  pri 
vate  conversation;  Judge  Bullitt  and  Mike 
Bright  had  given  the  same  opinion  to  him 
before.  Did  not  know  that  Mike  Bright 
was  a  member  of  the  order.  Bright  thought 
twenty  thousand  men  could  be  raised  in  the 
State  of  Indiana  to  further  insurrectionary 
movements,  but  that  the  State  would  not 
furnish  more.  This  expressed  opinion  of 
Bright  was  an  exception  to  that  of  the 
chiefs  of  the  order,  so  far  as  witness  had 
heard  them  express  themselves. 

Piper  professed  to  have  official  orders, 
from  Vallandigham,  of  a  military  character. 
Vallaudigham  had  been  represented  to 
witness  as  the  Supreme  Grand  Commander 
of  the  United  States;  elected  on  the  22d 
day  of  February,  in  New  York.  Under 
stood  from  Piper  that  Vallandigham  had 
knowledge  of  this  insurrectionary  move 
ment,  and  had  given  his  sanction  to  it 
that  he  had  supreme  control  of  it,  and  the 
particular  day  for  the  rising  was  left  to  his 
discretion.  Witness  understood  that  Val- 
landigham  knew  of  the  action  of  the  meet 
ing  at  Chicago,  and  approved  of  it.  Heard 
Vallandigham  speak  at  Hamilton,  on  the 
15th  of  June,  but  had  no  interview  with 
him. 

In  addition  to  the  rituals,  etc.,  there 
was  the  unwritten  work  of  the  order 
which  could  not  be  gathered  from  the 
printed  books.  The  unwritten  work  of 
the  order  was  mainly  confined  to  the 
third  degree  members.  It  consisted  of 
signs,  colloquies,  etc.,  by  which  members 
make  themselves  known  to  each  other,  ane 
gained  admittance  to  lodges  where  they 
were  not  known.  There  were  also  instruc 
tions  as  to  the  designs  of  the  order,  im 
parted  to  members  who  were  thought  wor 
thy  of  the  thre«  degrees,  that  were  noi 


;onsidered  suitable  to  be  known  to  less  re- 
iable  members  of  the  order.  The  printed 
vorks  did  not  say  any  thing  about  the  mili- 
:ary  character  of  the  order,  or  about  co-op- 
^ration  with  the  South,  or  resistance  to  the 
Government  by  force  of  arms;  but  to  a 
hird  degree  member  they  gave  that  instruc 
tion  and  information.  To  second  degree 
members,  who  were  considered  worthy, 
they  imparted  the  same  instructions.  First 
degree  members  were  not  considered  wor- 
:hy  to  receive  these  instructions.  If  they 
got  them  at  all,  it  would  be  through  the 
riends  who  were  considered  worthy. 

Did  not  know  the  relative  proportion  of 
3rst,  second  and  third  degree  members. 
As  a  general  rule,  first  degree  members 
were  more  numerous  than  second  degree 
members  ;  while  second  and  third  degree 
members  were  about  equal.  In  Indiariapo- 
iis  township,  the  second  and  third  degree 
members  numbered  only  about  sixty  odd 
men ;  but  Mr.  Harrison  said  one  thousand 
or  twelve  hundred  could  be  got  into  the 
order.  They  thought  it  advisable  to  take 
in  only  responsible  men,  who  would  influ 
ence  others  to  join  when  the  proper  time 
came. 

As  to  the  available  means  of  the  order,  in 
arms  and  ammunition,  Dr.  Bowles  said  he 
knew  a  man  who  would  furnish  any  amount 
of  arms  and  powder,  at  any  time  and  place 
the  order  might  designate.  Did  not  know 
that  the  order  had  any  storehouses,  arsenals, 
or  depots  for  arms,  or  that  the  members  had 
arms  beyond  what  citizens  usually  have. 
Did  not  know  of  any  i'unds  raised  to  pur 
chase  aims,  though  that  question  was  dis 
cussed  at  length  at  the  meeting  of  the 
Council  in  this  city,  on  the  14th  of  June. 

At  that  meeting,  a  committee  of  thirteen 
was  appointed,  to  act  for  the  Council  in  any 
emergency,  during  the  recess  of  that  body, 
and  whose  acts  were  to  be  as  legal  as  though 
the  Grand  Council  had  passed  them. 

Had  not  been  under  arrest.  Witness' 
testimony  was  not  given  to  save  him  from 
prosecution.  Resided  new  at  Matcon,  Illi 
nois.  Was  raised  in  Kentucky,  and  had 
lived  in  different  parts  of  the  State  for 
eleven  years;  principally  engaged  in  car 
pentering,  and  in  the  dry  goods  business. 
Had  been  in  the  army,  in  Company  E,  15th 
Kentucky ;  but  was  detailed  as  clerk  from 
the  first,  Lelt  the  aimy  on  the  14th  of 
February,  honorably  discharged  for  disabil 
ity.  Went  into  the  detective  service  on  the 
5th  of  May.  Applied  for  business  generally, 
and  was  appointed  to  this  particular  duty. 

Never  saw  Booking  before  meeting  him 
at  his  room  in  the  Louisville  Hotel,  when 
he  explained  his  infernal  machines.  Bowles, 
Kalfus  and  Miller  were  there,  and  otluis, 
who  were  members  of  the  order.  Had 
heard  that  Booking  had  brought  the  coni 
cal  shell  to  the  notice  of  the  Government, 
but  did  not  know  that  he  had  offered  the 


32 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


spherical  hand  grenade.  Dr.  Bowles  invited 
these  members  to  Booking's  room,  to  see 
whether  these  instruments  could  not  be 
made  available  in  carrying  out  the  schemes 
of  the  order  against  the  Government. 
Bowles  said  Booking  was  a  member  of  the 
order.  The  project  of  assisting  the  South 
was  discussed  that  day  in  his  room  and  in 
his  presence,  and  Booking  said  these  shells, 
with  the  clock  arrangement,  and  the  Greek 
fire,  were  the  very  things  that  should  be 
used,  as  I  understood,  for  the  destruction 
of  Government  property.  Bowles  further 
said,  that  he  had  tested  Booking  well  before 
they  initiated  him ;  that  he  had  been  sent 
by  the  order  to  Canada,  and  made  to  spend 
his  own  money  in  experimenting  and  test 
ing  this  thing  for  the  benefit  of  the  order. 
Bowles  also  said  that  he,  Bullitt,  Dodd,  a 
chemist,  and  one  or  two  others,  had  spent 
one  Sunday  in  a  basement  in  this  city,  ex 
perimenting  with  the  Greek  fire,  when  peo 
ple  thought  they  were  at  church. 

Had  been  at  Dr.  Bowies'  house  three 
times.  Had  seen  him  once  at  Paoli,  once 
at  Louisville,  and  once  in  Indianapolis,  at 
the  meeting  of  the  Council  of  the  order. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Thursday.  September  29,  at  2  o'clock. 
P.M. 


COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,        ) 
September  29,  1864,  2  o'clock,  P.  M.  j 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

In  consequence  of  the  absence  of  a  mem 
ber,  the  Commission  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Friday,  September  30,  at  8  o'clock,  A.  M. 


COURT  EOOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,        \ 
September  30,  1864,  8  o'clock,  A.  M.  j 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

All  the  members  present ;  also  the  Judge 
Advocate,  the  accused,  and  his  counsel. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

The  cross-examination  of  Felix  G.  Stidger, 
a  witness  for  the  Government,  was  then  re 
sumed. 

The  witness,  after  replying  to  questions 
of  counsel,  relative  to  his  particular  ocpupa- 
tion,  by  whom  employed,  and  places  of 
abode,  for  the  past  eleven  years,  testified  as 
follows : 

Introduced  himself  to  Dr.  Bowles,  and 
registered  his  name  at  French  Lick  Springs, 
as  J.  J.  Grundy.  Dr.  Bowles  asked  him  if 
he  knew  any  thing  about  the  Democratic 
organization  in  the  State  of  Kentucky? 
Told  Bowles  that  he  did ;  that  he  was  a  first 
degree  member  of  it;  on  which  Bowles  told 
him  that  he  was  Military  Chief  of  the  order, 
and  that  a  man  by  the  name  of  Wright,  of 
New  York,  was  the  Civil  Chief.  He  also  gave 
witness  the  plans  and  designs  of  the  Order 
of  the  Sons  of  Liberty  up  to  that  time. 


The  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty  was  a 
continuation  of  the  Order  of  American 
Knights,  though  all  the  members  of  the 
former  were  not,  in  all  cases,  deemed  wor 
thy  to  become  members  of  the  Sons  of  Lib 
erty.  Could  not  give  the  exact  nature  and 
extent  of  the  change,  never  having  been  a 
member  of  the  Order  of  American  Knights. 
Had  been  told  by  members  that  the  Order 
of  American  Knights  was  changed  to  the 
Order  of*  Sons  of  Liberty,  and  that  an  addi 
tion  had  been  made  to  the  colloquy  of  re 
cognition  between  members  of  the  order. 
The  colloquy,  "  Resistance  to  tyrants  is  obe 
dience  to  God,"  was  said  to  have  been  added 
by  Mr.  Vallandigham,  after  the  work  had 
been  revised  by  the  committee  in  New 
York.  Mr.  Piper  also  said  the  ritual  had 
been  somewhat  changed  in  other  respects. 

In  witness'  conversation  with  Dr.  Bowles, 
he  gave  a  programme  of  the  operations  of 
the  order.  Illinois  was  pledged  to  forward 
fifty  thousand  men,  to  concentrate  at  St 
Louis,  and  to  co-operate  with  Missouri, 
which  was  pledged  to  furnish  thirty  thou 
sand,  and  these  combined  forces  were  to 
co-operate  with  Price,  who  was  to  invade 
Missouri  with  twenty  thousand,  and  more, 
if  possible,  by  the  assistance  of  Jeff  Davis. 
These  one  hundred  thousand  men  were  to 
hold  Missouri  against  any  Federal  forces 
that  could  be  brought  against  them.  In 
diana  was  to  furnish  forty  thousand  to  sixty 
thousand  men,  to  co-operate  with  other 
forces  that  might  come  from  Ohio,  and  all 
were  to  be  thrown  on  Louisville,  to  co 
operate  with  whatever  force  Jeff  Davis 
might  send  into  Eastern  Kentucky,  under 
Buckner  or  Breckinridge,  as  Davis  might 
deem  best.  Dr.  Bowles  gave  him  this,  in 
the  first  conversation,  as  the  programme 
of  the  war  at  that  time. 

On  leaving  Louisville,  on  the  26th  of 
May,  witness  stopped  at  Salem,  Indiana; 
registered  his  name  at  the  Forsyth  House 
as  J.  J.  Grundy.  Had  a  conversation  with 
Mr.  Heffren.  First  became  acquainted  with 
him  on  witness'  first  visit  to  Dr.  Bowles. 
Heffren  was  formerly  a  Lieutenant  Colonel 
of  an  Indiana  regiment.  Thought  witness 
was  a  commissioner  from  some  rebel  forces 
in  Kentucky.  Heffren  was  looking  for  a 
commissioner,  so  he  said,  to  tell  him  about 
some  rebel  regiments  that  had  disbanded 
in  Kentucky,  after  Forrest's  raid  and  mas 
sacre  at  Fort  Pillow. 

Heffren  told  witness  that  he  had  been 
to  Indianapolis  a  few  days  before,  and 
had  seen  H.  H.  Dodd ;  that  they  had  con 
sulted  together  about  the  time  of  calling 
a  meeting  of  the  Grand  Council  of  tho 
State,  and  that  it  would  be  between  the 
15th  and  17th  of  June.  Told  witness  that 
he  and  Dodd  were  the  only  two  men  who 
had  the  right  of  calling  the  members  of 
the  order  together,  and  that  it  would  num 
ber  between  seventy-five  and  eighty  thou- 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


sand  meiij  and  that  the  organization  was 
about  complete. 

With  this  information  witness  went  to 
Dr.  Bowles  a  second  time.  He  had  been 
away  from  home,  but  no  one  appeared  to 
know  where.  Bowles  said,  he  had  been  at 
Indianapolis,  and  at  a  meeting  there  he 
had  met  some  of  the  chiefs  of  Illinois. 
Judge  Bullitt,  of  Kentucky;  Barrett,  of 
Missouri;  and  the  heads  of  Indiana  were 
there.  Their  occupation  on  Sunday,  dur 
ing  the  time  they  were  here,  was  down  in 
the  basement  of  a  building,  testing  their 
Greek  fire.  They  had  a  chemist  there 
whom  Bowles  said  he  had  known  for  some 
time,  and  that  now  they  had  nearly  brought 
this  Greek  fire  to  perfection.  Bowles  said 
that,  at  the  meeting,  Barrett  pledged  Mis 
souri  for  thirty  thousand  men,  and  Illinois 
pledged  fifty  thousand  to  co-operate  with 
Price,  and  Indiana  would  furnish  forty 
thousand  men.  Before,  he  had  said  that 
Indiana  would  furnish  more. 

Became  acquainted  with  Judge  Bullitt, 
from  Dr.  Bowles  giving  him  a  message  to 
take.  Saw  Judge  Bullitt  about  the  31st  of 
May.  The  message  was,  that  Mr.  Hum 
phreys  was  willing  to  take  a  Brigadier  Gen 
eralship,  and  to  remain  in  the  rear.  The  ar 
rangement  had  been  talked  of  in  Indian 
apolis,  and  Bowles  told  witness  to  tell  Bul 
litt  that  it  was  satisfactory.  Bullitt  ap 
proved,  and  went  on  to  say,  that  he  had 
spent  a  great  deal  of  money  in  the  affair, 
and  that  he  was  willing  to  spend  every 
cent  he  had,  but  that  he  hoped  soon  to  be 

able  to  steal  a  good  living  from  the  d d 

sons  of  b s.  Witness  gave  his  correct 

name  to  Judge  Bullitt,  while  to  Bowles  he 
was  still  J.  J.  Gruncly;  they,  however, 
seemed  to  understand  each  other  in  the 
matter. 

A  conference  respecting  the  murder  of 
Coffin,  was  held  on  the  1st  or  2d  of  June. 
Judge  Bullitt,  Mr.  Piper,  Chambers,  of  Gal- 
latin  county,  Tennessee,  D.  C.  Phipps,  of 
Louisville,  Dr.  Kalfus  and  witness,  were 
present.  Immediately  after  he  was  sent  to 
Dr.  Bowles,  on  which  occasion  he  revealed 
his  true  name.  The  reason  he  gave  for  his 
assumed  name  was,  that  he  had  been 
watched  by  a  United  States  Detective 
officer — which  was  true — and  that  he 
changed  his  name  to  avoid  being  followed. 
The  message  witness  took  to  Bowles,  was 
that  Coffin  should  be  murdered,  or,  as  he 
said,  as  he  had  been  instrumental  in  get 
ting  him  into  the  order,  he  ought  to  assist 
in  getting  him  out.  The  message  to  Bowles 
about  Coffin  was  verbal;  it  was  not  deemed 
prudent  to  commit  such  things  to  writing. 
Bowles  told  witness  to  tell  Dodd,  that  lie 
should  set  two  men  on  Coffin's  track,  and 
that  Dodd  was  to  get  him  out  of  the  way. 
Bowles  did  not  say  murder  him;  it  was  to 
get  him  out  of  the  way,  or  make  away  with 
him.  Witness  then  came  to  Indianapolis 
3 


and  saw  Coffin;  was  introduced  to  him  by 
Mr.  James  Prentice,  a  United  States  De 
tective.  Had  sent  word  to  Mr.  Coffin  pre 
viously  by  Prentice,  that  he  was  to  be  mur 
dered. 

Saw  H.  II.  Dodd  on  the  5th  of  May. 
Had  the  conversation  about  the  murder  of 
Coffin.  Dr.  Gatling  was  in  Dodd's  office, 
but  did  not  know  that  he  heard  the  con 
versation  about  Coffin.  Dodd,  in  reply  to 
the  message  from  Bullitt  and  Bowles,  said, 
if  Coffin  had  betrayed  the  secrets  of  the  or 
der,  he  ought  to  be  disposed  of,  or  made 
way  with.  Witness  stayed  in  Indianapolis 
all  day,  and  went  to  Governor  Morton's  in 
the  evening.  The  Governor  understood 
his  business.  From  there  he  went  to  Gen 
eral  Carrington's. 

Returned  to  Indianapolis  on  the  13th 
of  June,  at  the  instance  of  Dr.  Bowles. 
Dodd  also  said,  he  would  like  witness 
to  be  present  at  the  meeting  of  the  Grand 
Council  on  the  14th.  It  was  at  that 
meeting  that  the  murder  of  Coffin  was  dis 
cussed.  No  vote  was  taken,  but  all  present 
seemed  unanimous.  There  was  no  dissent 
ing  voice,  of  the  forty  or  fifty  who  were 
present.  Dr.  Gatling  was  present  at  the 
meeting.  Dodd  said  he  should  go  to  Ham 
ilton,  and  wanted  to  know  who  would  go 
with  him.  McBride  said,  he  was  sorry 
that  circumstances  prevented  his  going. 
McBride  was  a  heavy  set  man,  rather 
fleshy,  medium  hight,  probably  about 
forty  years  of  age.  Dodd,  Bowles  and  wit 
ness  went  to  Hamilton.  Milligan  was  there, 
but  did  notkndw  that  he  went  on  the  same 
train.  After  Vallandigham  had  done  speak 
ing,  witness  went  up  to  bid  Dodd  and 
Bowles  good-by.  They  asked  him  if  he 
had  seen  any  thing  of  Coffin;  witness  said 
he  did  not  know  him,  when  they  remem 
bered  that  he  had  told  them  so  before. 

Was  in  Indianapolis  about  a  week  after. 
Witness  believed  that  was  the  time  when  we 
watched  in  Mr.  Ristine' s  office  for  Coffin. 
Dodd  took  him  there,  and  mentioned  the 
circumstance  about  Coffin  before  Mr.  Ristine. 
Dodd  then  took  witness  to  young  Ristine, 
and  desired  him  to  point  out  Coffin  in  the 
event  of  his  passing  the  office. 

Q.  Had  Dodd  explained  to  young  Ristine 
the  purpose  for  which  he  wanted  you  to 
see  Coffin? 

A.  No,  sir;  he  did  not. 

Q.  Then  you  do  not  know  that  young 
Ristine  knew  that  you  wanted  to  kill  Coffin, 
if  you  saw  him? 

A.  No,  sir;  he  did  not. 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Ad 
vocate,  on  the  ground  that  the  counsel  for 
the  accused  was  assuming  as  a  fact  what 
had  not  been  asserted  by  the  witness. 

Question  and  answer  withdrawn  by  coun 
sel  for  the  accused. 

Q.  Did  you  not  pretend  and  assume  to 
those  men  that  you  yourself  would  make 


34 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


way  with  Coffin,  if  a  suitable  opportunity  I  understanding,  I  have  110  objection  to  the 


know  that  I  said  any  thing 


occurred  ? 

A.  I  do  not 
more  than  that  I  hoped  to  meet  him  under 
more  favorable  circumstances,  not  referring 
in  any  way  to  what  those  circumstances 
might  be,  friendly  or  otherwise. 

Q,   What  impression  did  you  intend  to  j 
make  upon  their  minds,  by  what  you  said  ? 

A.  I  left  them  to  draw  their  own  infer 
ence? 

Q,  What  was  your  avowed  purpose  in 
watching  for  him? 

A.  To  see  him,  because  they  wished  me 
to  see  him,  to  know  him  when  I  saw  him. 

Q.  For  what  purpose  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know,  except  it  was  their  in 
tention  that  I  should  kill  him;  but  I  do  not 
know  what  their  intention  was. 

Q.  Was  not  the  drift  of  your  actions  and 
conduct  that  day  to  give  these  men  the  idea 
that  you  wished  to  kill  him  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  what  construction  they 
put  upon  my  conduct  ? 

Q.  Was  it  not  your  intention  to  mislead 
them  into  the  belief  that  you  wished  to  kill 
him? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate,  and  withdrawn. 

Q.  Then  young  Ilistine  did  not  know  that 
your  intentions  were  hostile  toward  Coffin, 
did  he  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  none  of  them  knew  that  I  had 
any  hostile  intentions  toward  Coffin  at  that 
time. 

Q.  Had  you  done  nothing  to  lead  them 
to  that  conclusion  ? 

A.  Not  that  I  know  of. 

Q.  Then  your  intention,  in  sitting  in  the 
Auditor's  office,  so  far  as  you  had  any  inten 
tion,  or  confided  any  intention,  was  lawful 


and  legitimate  ? 


A.  It  was.  Simply  to  see  Coffin  and  know 
him. 

Q.  Then  they,  so  far  as  you  knew,  under 
stood  that  to  be  your  intention  ? 

The  question  was  objected  to  by  the  Judge 
Advocate,  and  withdrawn. 

Q.  You  knew  Coffin  perfectly  well  at  that 
time,  did  you  not  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  It  was  not,  then,  a  lonafde  intention  to 
know  Coffin  that  induced  you  to  sit  there  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  for  I  knew  him  already. 

Q.  What  was  your  object  in  going  there 
to  see  him  ? 

The  Judge  Advocate  objected. 


question. 

Q.  What  was  your  object  in  going  there 
to  see  him  ? 

A.  That  they  might  have  the  satisfaction 
of  pointing  Coffin  out  to  me. 

Q.  Is  Coffin  still  alive  ? 

A.  He  was  yesterday. 

Did  not  know  why  the  uprising  of  the 
order  did  not  take  place  on  the  15th  or  16th 
of  August.  He  got  the  programme  from 
Dodd,  on  the  Tuesday  following  Bullitt's  ar 
rest,  which  was  on  Saturday.  On  Thursday 
of  the  same  week  he  went  to  Dr.  Bowles, 
who  at  first  hesitated  about  telling  witness, 
but  when  he  found  that  witness  already 
knew  of  the  contemplated  uprising,  he  told 
him  that  they  had  agreed  at  Chicago  to 
wait  for  the  co-operation  of  the  rebels,  but 
after  they  came  from  Chicago,  Dodd  and 
others  determined  not  to  wait  for  their  co 
operation.  Witness  understood  that  Bowles 
had  received  a  message  from  Dodd,  an 
nouncing  that  the  military  commanders  of 
the  order  had  had  a  meeting,  and  a  change 
of  the  original  programme  had  been  de 
cided  on.  On  going  to  Dr.  Bowles,  witness 
met  Dodd's  son  on  horseback,  coming  away. 
He  was  a  boy  of  thirteen  or  fourteen  years 
of  age.  Had  seen  the  boy  in  Dodd's  office, 
and  heard  him  call  Dodd  father.  Bowles 
told  him  the  boy  had  been  there. 

Bowles  said  he  would  call  a  meeting  of 
the  Grand  Commanders  and  Major  Gener 
als  in  a  few  days.  He  would  probably  have 
them  meet  at  his  house,  and  he  would  give 
me  the  result  of  their  deliberations  after 
ward.  The  uprising  would  take  place  or 
not,  as  the  military  chiefs  determined. 
Bowles  said  he  might  consent  to  it  at  the 
appointed  time,  with  the  co-operation  of  the 
rebel  Colonels  Syphert,  Jesse  and  Walker, 
who  were  then  said  to  be  in  Kentucky. 

Did  not  know  to  what  members  of  the 
order  this  insurrectionary  scheme  had  been 
confided,  but  Dodd  remarked  to  Harrison 
and  witness,  that  he  suspected  the  propriety 
of  confiding  the  scheme  to  Dan.  Voorhees. 
Harrison,  too,  thought  it  best  not  to  com 
municate  it  to  Voorhees.  Dodd  replied, 
"  You  are  the  only  two  persons  I  communi 
cate  all  my  plans  to."  The  knowledge  of 


the  insurrectionary  scheme, 
extended    to   the   members 


witness  knew, 
of  the   Grand 


to  the  question.  The  witness  need  not 
state  what  his  object  was,  as  that  is  not  com 
petent  evidence. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  replied:  I 
submit  to  the  Court,  that,  while  it  is  not 
strictly  competent  evidence,  I  desire  that 
the  witness  state  what  his  object  was,  and 
leave  its  competency  to  be  decided  by  the 


Council,  but  he  believed  the  exact  time  de 
termined  on  was  confined  to  the  Grand  Com- 
I  object  mander  and  his  Major  Generals.     Voorhees 


Court. 
The  Judge  Advocate  replied : 


was  not  wholly  confided  in  by  Dodd,  but  he 
seemed  to  be  in  the  confidence  of  the  or 
ganization,  and  they  were  perfectly  free 
with  him  about  it. 

Colonel  Anderson,  a  rebel  officer  of  the 
3d  Kentucky  Cavalry,  who  was  on  parole  in 
Louisville,  and  had  given  bond  about  the 


1st  of  Julv,  was  initiated 


member  of 


the  order  by  Dr.  Kalfus.     Kalfus  gave  him 
With  that  I  the  vestibule  and  first  degree,  and  witness 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


35 


gave  him  the  second  and  third  degrees,  at 
the  instance  of  Dr.  Kalfus.  Witness  re 
ported  the  fact  to  Colonel  Farleigh,  Com 
mander  of  the  Post  at  Louisville,  and  an 
order  of  banishment  was  issued,  though  it 
never  reached  Anderson,  who  left  for  Can 
ada.  Anderson  said  that  had  he  received 
his  order  of  banishment  for  breaking  his 
parole,  he  would  go  to  the  Southern  army 
again. 

Had  some  conversation  with  Dr.  Bowles 
about  the  establishment  of  a  North-western 
Confederacy.  Bowles  said  that  Republican 
leaders  had  told  him  that  the  Government 
would  acknowledge  the  independence  of 
the  Southern  Confederacy,  provided  they 
were  certain  that  no  attempt  would  be 
made  to  establish  a  North-western  Confede 
racy. 

The  two  gentlemen  who  went  to  see  Bul- 
litt,  on  the  Saturday  afternoon,  were  A.  O. 
Brannan,  and  Dr.  Bayliss;  and  Dr.  Kalfus 
and  Mr.  Thomas,  the  jailor,  went  to  see  him 
on  Sunday  morning. 

Had  a  conversation  with  Ristine  and 
Dodd,  in  Ristine's  office,  about  the  letter 
from  Dick  Bright.  They  said  the  letter 
was  addressed  to  all  three  of  them.  Dr. 
Chambers,  of  Warsaw,  Gallatin  county,  said 
he  had  directed  Jesse  D.  Bright  to  write 
that  letter,  but  he  supposed  Jesse  had  di 
rected  Dick  Bright  to  write  it.  Mr.  Cham 
bers  was  a  member  of  the  order. 

Piper  said  he  had  a  communication  from 
Mr.  Vallandigham  to  Dr.  Bowles,  which  re 
ferred  to  the  release  of  rebel  prisoners  at 
Johnson's  Island,  as  part  of  the  insurrec 
tionary  programme.  Captain  Hines,  a  rebel 
officer,  who  was  captured,  imprisoned,  and 
escaped  with  Morgan,  was  -to  have  charge 
of  the  duty  of  releasing  the  prisoners  at 
Johnson's  Island.  Piper  told  witness,  while 
in  Dr.  Kalfus'  office,  at  Louisville,  that  Cap 
tain  Hines  was  on  Vallandigham's  staff 

Dodd  also  told  Judge  Bullitt  that  he 
would  get  together  the  men  he  could,  and 
undertake  the  release  of  the  prisoners  at 
Camp  Morton,  Indianapolis;  and  in  the 
event  of  his  not  succeeding,  he  wouldmake 
his  escape. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  here  objected 
to  the  witness'  voluntary  statements  not 
asked  for,  and  to  his  giving  hearsay  testi 
mony.  Counsel  desired  that  the  last  state 
ment  of  witness  might  be  stricken  from  the 
record. 

The  Judge  Advocate,  in  reply,  said,  that 
a  statement  once  upon  the  record  could  not 
be  stricken  from  it.  At  the  final  delibera 
tion,  the  Commission  would  determine  what 
was  evidence,  and  the  reliability  or  other 
wise  of  the  witness'  statements. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  assented  to 
this  view,  and  withdrew  his  objection. 

Witness,  of  his  own  knowledge,  did  not 
know  that  the  Order  of  American  Knights 
and  the  Order  of  the  Sons  .of  Liberty  were 


the  same  order,  but  Dr.  Kalfus,  Harrison, 
Bowles,  Piper,  and  other  members  of  the 
order,  had  so  informed  him.  Harrison  had 
told  witness  that  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of 
Liberty  had  had  four  different  names. 

The  members  of  the  order  were  sworn  to 
obey  the  orders  of  their  Commanders,  irre 
spective  of  the  orders  or  laws  of  the  Gov 
ernment. 

The  attention  of  the  witness  was  here 
called  to  the  book,  already  in  evidence,  con 
taining  the  list  of  members  of  the  order  in 
Indianapolis;  also  the  roll  of  rebel  pris 
oners. 

Witness  first  saw  the  book  in  Harrison's 
office.  Harrison  showed  him  the  list  of 
members  of  the  order,  but  not  the  other 
names. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  objected  to 
the  introduction  of  the  whole  book  in  evi 
dence. 

The  Judge  Advocate  replied,  that  the 
book,  as  a  whole,  had  been  introduced  in 
evidence,  though 'the  attention  of  the  wit 
ness  had  been  called  only  to  the  names  of 
the  members  of  the  order.  It  was  for  the 
Commission  to  determine  what  relation,  if 
any,  one  list  in  the  book  bore  to  the  other. 
There  was  nothing  to  preclude  the  whole 
book  from  being  received  in  evidence  by  the 
Commission. 

The  objection  of  the  counsel  was  then 
withdrawn.  .  ,.%. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate : 

I  wish  you  to  state  whether  any  thing  has 
been  said  to  you,  on  the  part  of  the  author 
ities  or  by  me  in  their  behalf,  of  any  prom 
ises,  or  intention  on  the  part  of  Government, 
to  reward  you  for  any  testimony  given  by 
you  before  this  Commission  ? 

A.  Not  a  word. 

Q.  Did  I,  or  did  I  not,  expressly  state, 
that  the  only  way  in  which  you  could  come 
as  a  witness  before  this  Commission,  was,  to 
make  a  full,  free  and  truthful  statement  of 
what  had  occurred,  within  your  knowledge, 
in  connection  with  this  order  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Has  there  ever  been  any  intimation, 
or  hint,  of  any  intention  on  the  part  of  the 
Government,  to  waive  any  arrest,  or  pro 
cess  for  arrest,  as  a  reward  for  any  thing  you 
might  say  or  do  in  this  trial  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Will  you  state  who  it  was  that  first  re 
vealed  to  you,  or  to  the  order,  that  Coffin 
was  a  detective  ? 

A.  Dr.  Chambers. 

Q.  Where  did  he  first  announce  it? 

A.  In  Dr.  Kalfus'  office,  in  the  city  of 
Louisville. 

Q.  Had  he  known  Coffin  before? 

A.  He  said  he  knew  him  previously. 

Q.  Who  were  present  when  he  spoke  of 
Coffin  as  a  detective  ? 


36 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


A.  Judge  Bullitt,  Piper,  T.  C.  Wips,  Kal- 
fus,  and  myself. 

Q.  Was  this  Captain  Hines,  you  mention 
as  on  Vallandigham's  staff,  appointed  be 
fore  or  after  his  capture? 

A.  After  his  escape  from  prison  in  Ohio. 

Q.  Then  it  was  after  Hines'  capture,  im 
prisonment,  and  escape,  that  he  accepted  a 
commission  on  Vallandigham's  staff,  and 
was  assigned  to  the  releasing  of  the  prison 
ers  at  Johnson's  Island. 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  stated  that  this  order  has  had 
four  different  names.  Did  you  learn  them? 

A.  I  learned  only  the  names,  Order  of 
American  Knights  and  Sons  of  Liberty. 
Nothing  was  said  to  me  about  the  Knights 
of  the  Golden  Circle. 

Q.  In  your  examination,  I  understood 
you  to  say  that  you  had  a  conversation  here 
with  certain  parties  on  the  5th  or  6th  of 
May.  Did  you  mean  to  say  May  or  June? 

A.  June.  I  was  not  here  in  May,  nor 
until  the  5th  of  June. 

Q.  I  will  now  ask  you,  as  it  has  been 
asked  you  on  the  part  of  the  defense, 
whether  there  was  not  an  unwritten  work 
of  the  order,  which  contains  or  contem 
plates  a  military  organization,  and  also 
signs,  grips,  passwords,  colloquies,  and  modes 
of  recognition? 

A.  There  is. 

Q.  Youfnay  now  give  to  the  Commission 
what  you  mean  by  the  unwritten,  part  of 
the  work  of  the  order. 

A.  There  are,  in  the  unwritten  work,  cer 
tain  signs,  grips  and  colloquies,  used  in  the 
recognition  and  testing  of  members,  as  fol 
lows:  If  you  are  a  member  of  the  Vesti 
bule  degree,  and  you  meet  a  stranger  whom 
you  suppose  to  be  a  member  of  the  order, 
you  test  him  in  the  sign  of  the  degree, 
thus:  You  place  the  heel  of  your  right  foot 
in  the  hollow  of  the  left,  with  the  right 
hand  under  the  left  arm,  bringing  the  left 
hand  under  the  right  arm,  thus  folding  the 
arms,  and  placing  the  four  fingers  of  the  left 
hand  over  the  right  arm.  The  stranger,  or 
person  addressed,  if  a  member  of  the  order, 
will  take  the  same  position.  That  is  as  far 
as  you  go  in  public.  You  then  retire  to 
some  place,  where  you  will  not  be  observed, 
and  continue  to  test  him.  You  advance 
your  right  foot,  and  he  will  advance  his 
right  foot  to  meet  yours.  The  two  then 
take  an  ordinary  grip  with  the  right  hands, 
at  the  same  time  placing  the  left  hand  on 
the  right  breast.  If  you  find  him  incorrect, 
you  stop.  If  correct,  you  proceed  with  the 
following  colloquy,  which  is  given  in-  altern 
ate  syllables  by  the  parties,  first  the  pass 
word  of  the  order  for  that  degree,  which  is 
the  word  Calhoun  spelled  backward,  thus: 
"Nu— oh— lac"— "S.—  L."  —"Give  me  lib 
erty — or  give  me  death."  Then  you  give 
one  shake  of  the  hand.  [The  dashes  indi 
cate  that  the  syllables  or  phrases  are  altern 


ately  pronounced  by  the  parties.]  In  this 
Vestibule  degree  there  is  also  a  -signal  of 
distress.  This  is  given  by  placing  the  left 
hand  on  the  right  breast.,  and  raising  the 
right  hand  and  arm  to  their  full  hight  once, 
if  it  is  in  the  day-time.  If  at  night,  when 
that  could  not  be  seen,  you  give  the  word 
oak-oun  three  times,  thus:  "Oak-oun,  oak- 
oun,  oak-oun."  Oak  is  the  tree  of  the 
acorn,  which  is  the  symbolical  emblem  of 
the  order,  and  "  oun"'  is  the  last  syllable  of 
the  password  as  it  is  usually  pronounced. 
In  the  first  degree,  the  same  position  of  the 
feet  and  arms  is  taken,  except  that  in  place 
of  four  fingers  over  the  right  arm,  the  first 
two  fingers  are  so  placed,  and  they  are  sep 
arated.  This  position,  of  the  fingers  ia 
taught  to  have  reference  to  the  sovereignty 
of  States.  The  feet  being  in  the  same 
position  as  in  the  other  degree,  they  are 
advanced  as  before  mentioned.  In  taking 
the  grip,  each  one  runs  his  first  finger  upon 
the  wrist  of  the  other,  taking  the  ordi 
nary  grip  with  the  other  three  fingers, 
running  the  thumbs  as  nearly  straight  as 
possible.  This  grip  is  taught  to  be  as  near 
the  shape  of  the  acorn — the  universal  em 
blem  of  the  order — as  can  be  made  with 
the  hand.  The  left  hand  is  to  be  placed  on 
the  breast  as  before.  The  colloquy  is  re 
peated  thus:  "If  you  go  to  the  East- — I  will 
go  to  the  West.  Let  there  be  no  strife — 
between  mine  and  thine — for  we — be  breth 
ren — 0 — S — L — Kesistance  to  tyrants — is 
obedience  to  God."  [All  colloquies  are  pro 
nounced  alternately,  as  indicated  by  the 
dashes.]  Great  care  is  taken  to  say  "be 
brethren,"  the  word  "be"  being  a  test  of 
membership.  The  part  of  this  colloquy,  given 
after  the  initial  "  0.  S.  L.,"  is  said  to  have  been 
added  by  Mr.  Vallandigham.  when  the  work 
of  the  order  was  sent  to  him  for  revisal, 
after  the  committee  at  New  York  had  fin 
ished  their  part.  This  ig  the  first  temple 
degree. 

In  the  second  degree,  the  hands  are 
crossed  on  the  abdomen,  the  right  hand 
outside  to  represent  the  belt  of  Orion;  the 
thumbs  pointing  upward,  represent  the 
point  of  the  star  Arcturus.  The  feet  are 
placed  and  advanced  as  before.  The  collo 
quy  is  given  thus:  "What — a  star — Arc — 
turus — what  of  the  night — morning  cometh 
— Will  ye  inquire — inquire  ye — Return — 
come — password  of  degree — Orion."  This 
colloquy  is  taken  mostly  from  the  llth  and 
12th  verses  of  the  21st  chapter  of  Isaiah. 
The  grip  of  this  degree  is  the  ordinary  grip ; 
the  thumbs  of  the  joined  hands  pointing 
upward,  representing  the  point  of  the  star 
Arcturus. 

The  sign  of  the  third  degree  is  given 
thus:  the  arms  are  crossed  on  the  breast, 
with  the  fingers  pointing  to  the  shoulders, 
the  right  arm  outside.  This  sign  is  said  to 
represent  the  Southern  cross,  as  seen  in  the 
heavens  south  of  the  equator.  The  feet  are 


TREASON   TRIALS  AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


37 


placed  and  advanced  as  before.  The  collo 
quy  is  thus  given:  "Whence — Seir — How — 
by  the  ford.  Name  it — Jaback.  Thy  pass 
word — Washington — Bayard."  Washington 
is  the  password  of  the  degree.  If  as  a 
stranger,  and  you  visit  any  lodge,  you  give 
three  knocks  at  the  door.  You  then  send 
in  your  name,  residence,  rank,  and  the 
•temple  where  you  belong.  If  you  are 
known,  you  are  admitted.  If  not,  a  com 
mittee  is  sent  out  to  examine  you.  They 
test  you,  and  if  they  find  you  perfect  in 
every  particular,  they  admit  you.  If  you 
fail  in  any  respect,  they  know  you  no  more. 
The  grip  is  given  by  locking  the  thumbs 
crosswise,  the  palm  of  the  hands  being 
downward,  and  the  hands  being  held  hori 
zontal.  It  is  a  grip  of  the  thumbs  alone. 

The  sign  of  the  Grand  Councillor's  de 
gree  is  given  by  placing  the  right  arm  in  the 
same  position  as  in  the  third  degree,  the 
left  hand  being  placed  under  the  right 


Q.  Is  this  part  of  the  instruction  given  in 
any  book? 

A.  The  passwords,  signs  and  colloquies 
are  not  given,  but  are  communicated  by 
members  of  the  order,  in  instructing  ini 
tiates.  This  is  the  portion  of  the  unwrit 
ten  work  Colonel  Anderson  applied  for,  to 
be  sent  from  Kentucky  to  him  in  Canada, 
in  secret  cypher. 

Q.  Did  I  not  understand  you  to  say  Judge 
Bullitt  was  searched  at  the  time  he  was 
arrested? 

A.  He  was  not  searched  in  my  presence. 
I  understood  he  was  searched  afterward. 
When  we  W7ere  going  to  the  cars  he  carried 
a  satchel  with  him,  and  handled  it  as 
though  it  was  very  heavy.  He  carried  it 
with  him  wherever  he  went,  and  remarked 
it  was  God  damned  heavy.  Afterward  I 
understood  he  had  gold  in  it;  that  he  had 
cashed  one  of  his  checks  on  Montreal,  and 
that  the  other  was  found  on  his  person 


elbow.  The  feet  are  in  the  same  position,  I  when  he  was  arrested.  Dodd  said  that  Bul- 
and  advanced  as  in  the  other  degrees.  You  I  litt  had  two  checks  on  his  person,  on  Mon- 
then  take  the  ordinary  grip  with  the  right  treal,  and  that  he  hoped  those  who  arrested 
hand,  and  with  the  left  hand  you  take  hold  I  him  had  not  searched  him,  but  had  acted 
of  the  right  elbow  of  the  person  you  are  the  gentleman  with  him.  He  hoped  he  had 


testing — he  doing  the  same.  You  then 
come  to  the  exact  position  of  folding  the 
arms  in  the  Vestibule  degree,  with  the  arms 
folded;  then  each  turns  one-fourth  around 
to  the  right,  facing  in  opposite  directions, 


had  an  opportunity  to  destroy  them,  after 
taking  the  numbers,  so  that  he  might  du 
plicate  them. 

George  E.  Pugh,  a  witness  for  the  Gov 
ernment,  was  then  introduced ;  and,  being 


when  the  colloquy  is  given  thus:  "Whence — j  duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testi- 
America — North — South."     America  is  the  fied  as  follows: 
password  of  the  Grand  Councillor's  degree. 


What  I  have  gone  through  with,  is  part 
of  the  unwritten  work  of  the  order.  There 
is  a  reference  in  the  ritual  to  a  passage  of 
Scripture  given  in  the  initiation  as  part  of 
the  charge — Isaiah  lix:  14-19.  This  pas 
sage,  as  well  as  the  "Invocation,"  are  said 
to  have  been  added  to  the  ritual  by  Val- 
landigham.  The  passage  reads : 

"  And  judgment  is  turned  away  back 
ward,  and  justice  standeth  afar  oft':  for 
truth  is  fallen  in  the  street,  and  equity  can 
not  enter.  Yea,  truth  faileth;  and  he  that 
departeth  from  evil,  maketh  himself  a 
prey ;  and  the  Lord  saw  it,  and  it  dis-  j 

*  1  T       -r-r  •  ,  •«  ,         ,  i  •  ^ 


Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate.  Please 
to  state  to  the  Commission  ycrur  name  and 
place  of  residence. 

A.  George  Ellis  Pugh.  I  reside  in  the 
city  of  Cincinnati,  Ohio. 

Q.  I  will  ask  you  whether  you  have  had 
any  knowledge  of  the  existence  of  the 
Order  of  American  Knights  or  Order  of 
the  Sons  of  Liberty  ? 

A.  None,  except  what  I  have  gathered 
from  the  newspapers. 

Q.  Are   you  acquainted  with    the  hand 
writing  of  C.  L.  Vallandigham? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Please  to  look  at  these  letters,  and  state 

pleased  Him  that  there  was  no  judgment,  i  to   the  Commission  whether  they  are  his 
And  He  saw  that  there  was  no  man,  and  I  signatures,   and   whether   they   are  in  his 
wondered   that   there  was  no   intercessor;   handwriting? 
therefore  His  arm  brought  salvation  unto'      [The  Judge  Advocate   here  handed  the 


Him;  and  His  righteousness,  it  sustained 
Him.  For  He  put  on  righteousness  as  a 
breast-plate,  and  a  helmet  of  salvation  upon 
His  head;  and  He  put  on  the  garments  of 
vengeance  for  clothing,  and  was  clad  with 
zeal  as  a  cloak.  According  to  their  deeds, 
accordingly  He  will  repay,  fury  to  His  ad 
versaries,  recompense  to  His  enemies;  to 
the  islands,  He  will  repay  recompense.  So 
shall  they  fear  the  name  of  the  Lord  from 
the  west,  and  His  glory  from  the  rising  of 
the  sun.  When  the  enemy  shall  come  in 
like  a  flood,  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  shall  lift 
up  a  standard  against  him," 


witness  four  letters,  one  dated  "  Windsor , 
C.  W.,  October  8,  1863,"  to  "My  dear  Vor- 
hees,"  and  signed  "C.  L.  Vail.;"  another  da 
ted  "  Windsor,  C.  W.,  May  12,  1864;'  to  "  Dr. 
Sir,"  signed  "C.  L.  V.;"  another  dated 
"May  31,  1864,"  to  "H.  H.  Dodd,  Esq.," 
signed  "C.  L.  Vail.;"  the  fourth  dated 
"Dayton,  Ohio,  June  28,  1864,"  with  the  ini 
tials' of  the  order,  "O.  S.  L.,"  under  the  date, 
giving  the  letter  an  official  character,  as 
connected  with  the  order,  addressed  to 
"Dr.  Sir,"  and  signed  "S.  C."] 

A.  I  believe  they  are  all  in  his  handwri 
ting. 


38 


TREASON    TRIALS    AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


The  Judge  Advocate  handed  the  witness 
a  letter,  dated  "  Windsor,  C.  W.,  1st  May, 
1864,"  addressed  to  "  H.  H.  Dodd,  Esq.,"  and 
signed  "  Friend,"  and  asked: 

Q.  Will  you  state  whether  that  is  Mr. 
Vallandigham's  handwriting? 

A.  It  is  not. 

The  letter,  dated  "May  31,  1864,"  ad 
dressed  to  "II.  II.  Dodd,  Esq.,"  and  signed 
'•  C.  L.  Vail.,"  was  here  introduced  in  evi 
dence  by  the  Judge  Advocate. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

Question  by  the  accused.  Mr.  Pugh,  you 
have  stated  that  these  letters  are  in  Mr. 
Vallandigham's  handwriting.  Will  you 
state  how  you  know  his  handwriting? 

A.  I  have  had  an  intimate  personal  ac 
quaintance  with'  him;  I  have  seen  him  write 
a  great  many  letters,  and  have  received  a 
great  many  letters  from  him. 

TESTIMONY    OF    JOSEPH    KIRKPATRICK. 

Joseph  Kirkpatrick,  a  witness  for  the 
Government,  was  then  introduced,  and 
being  duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate, 
testified  as  follows : 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate.  State 
to  the  Commission  your  name,  residence 
and  business. 

A.  My  name  is  Joseph  Kirkpatrick.  I 
reside  in  the  city  of  New  York,  where  I 
have  lived  since  1858.  I  am  a  merchant, 
and  have  dealt  in  fire-arms  for  the  last 
three  years. 

Q.  State  if  any  arms  were  sold  by  you  in 
New  York  city,  to  a  party  purporting  to  be 
Mr.  Parsons,  of  Indianapolis?  If  so,  state 
what  they  were,  and  describe  them  ? 

A.  1  sold  two  hundred  and  ninety  pistols 
to  a  man  in  New  York,  who  represented 
himself  not  as  Parsons,  but  as  L.  Harris. 

Q.  Did  you  make  any  contract  to  sell  him 
other  arms? 

A.  I  made  a  contract  to  sell  him  about 
two  thousand  five  hundred  revolvers. 

A.  Any  ammunition  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  one  hundred  and  thirty-five 
thousand  pistol  cartridges. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  these  arms  since  your 
arrival  in  this  city?  If  so,  state  where? 

A.  I  saw  them  at  the  Arsenal,  near  this 
city. 

Q.  How  were  they, boxed? 

A.  In  the  same  boxes  in  which  they  were 
packed  in  New  York,  and  they  are  the 
same  arms. 

Q.   How  were  the  boxes  marked? 

A.  They  were  marked  "J.  J.  Parsons,  In 
dianapolis.  Ind." 

(>.  Had  you  any  directions  about  the 
marking  of  these  boxes,  at  the  time  they 
were  shipped  from  New  York  ? 

A.  1  had  nothing  to  do  with  marking  the 
boxes.  Harris  marked  them  himself  in 
my  presence,  "J.  J.  Parsons  Indianapolis, 


Ind."  but  did  not  state  any  reasons  for 
marking  them  thus. 

Q.  Did  he  state  that  his  name  was  Par 
sons? 

A.  He  did  not. 

Q.  Was  your  attention  called  to  the  mark 
ing  of  the  boxes,  by  any  thing  said  about 
charges  on  the  arms? 

A.  No,  sir.  He  paid  for  the  arms  at  the 
time. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  from  the  conversation 
at  the  time  of  purchase,  where  the  arms 
were  to  be  shipped  to? 

A.  He  spoke  of  the  shipment  of  arms  to 
California,  and  to  Mexico,  and  said  that  the 
Government  seemed  to  be  very  willing  to 
permit  arms  to  be  shipped  to  California, 
and  thence  to  Mexico,  if  their  attention 
was  not  called  especially  to  it. 

Q.  Did  you  infer  from  that,  that  they 
were  to  be  shipped  to  the  California  market? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  many  revolvers  did  he  ship 
then? 

A.  Two  hundred  and  ninety.  He  paid  for 
them  at  the  time. 

Q.  How  many  more  did  he  contract  for? 

A.  About  two  thousand  five  hundred  re 
volvers. 

Q.  How  many  rounds  of  ammunition 
were  purchased  ? 

A.  Thirty-five  thousand  rounds  to  fi,t  the 
same  pistols,  which  were  shipped  at  the 
same  time. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

Question  by  the  accused.  Do  you  say 
that  the  arms  found  in  the  boxes  in  this 
city,  marked  "  J.  J.  Parsons,"  are  the  same 
you  sold  to  Harris? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  know  Harris  before  the  pur^ 
chase? 

A.  I  never  saw  him  before.,  nor  have  I 
seen  him  since. 

Q.  What  was  his  personal  appearance? 

A.  He  had  a  full  form;  was  about  six  feet 
high;  quite  a  large  man;  weighed  about 
two  hundred  pounds,  and  had  heavy  black 
whiskers. 

Q.  Was  there  any  other  person  with  him? 

A.  Once,  when  he  called  on  rne,  quite  a 
tall  young  man,  whom  he  introduced  as 
his  brother,  came  with  him,  and  he  said  if 
ne  did  not  call  again  himself,  this  young 
man  would  represent  him. 

Q.   When  did  he  pay  for  the  arms? 

A.  He  paid  for  the  first  order  when  they 
were  shipped.  He  said  in  a  few  days  he 
would  pay  for  the  others  and  give  shipping 
directions. 

Q.  Did  any  person  call  on  you  afterward, 
about  the  arms  contracted  for? 

A..  No.  sir. 

The  counsel  here  directed  the  attention 
of  the  witness  to  the  accused,  H.  H.  Dodd, 
and  asked: 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


39 


Q.  Was  the  accused  at  your  place  of  bu 
siness  at  any  time  with  this  party,  or  alone, 
in  connection  with  the  purchase  of  arms? 

A.  I  never  saw  him  there  at  all. 

Q.  You  only  inferred  then,  that  these  arms 
were  to  be  shipped  to  Mexico,  on  account 
of  the  willingness  of  the  Government? 

A.  That  was  my  inference  from  what  Mr. 
Harris  said. 

Q.  In  what  part  of  the  city  is  your  place 
of  business? 

A.  No.   1  Park  Place. 

Q.  What  is  the  name  of  your  firm  ? 

A.  Joseph  Kirkpatrick.  I  have  no  part 
ner. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate.  In  the 
statement  Harris  made  to  you  about  the 
willingness  of  the  Government  to  permit 
shipments  of  arms  to  Mexico,  if  their  at 
tention  was  not  called  directly  to  it,  you 
inferred  that  these  arms  were  to  be  so 
shipped? 

A.  That  was  the  inference,  or  the  conclu 
sion  I  arrived  at,  and  I  think  what  he  stated 
involved  that  inference. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned  to  2 
o'clock,  P.  M. 

AFTERNOON   SESSION. 

COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         ) 
September  30,  1804,  2  o'clock,  P.  M.  / 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

All  the  members  present ;  also  the  Judge 
Advocate,  the  accused,  and  his  counsel. 

TESTIMONY    OF    WM.    CLAYTON. 

Wm.  Clayton,  a  witness  for  the  Govern 
ment,  was  then  introduced,  and  being  duly 
sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as 
follows : 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate.  State 
your  name,  residence  and  occupation. 

A.  Wm.  Clayton.  I  reside  in  Roseville 
township,  Warren  county,  Illinois,  where  I 
have  lived  since  the  fall  of  1841.  I  am  a 
farmer. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  been  admitted  to  the 
lodges  of  a  certain  order  known  as  the  Or 
der  of  American  Knights,  or  Order  of  the 
Sons  of  Liberty;  and  if  so,  are  you  a  mem 
ber  of  such  an  organization? 

A.   I  suppose  I  am. 

Q,  Have  you  been  admitted  as  a  member 
of  this  organization? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Into  how  many  degrees? 

A.  Three, 

Q.  Have  you  now  or  ever  been  employed 
in  any  way  as  a  detective  for  the  Govern 
ment? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  join  this  order,  and  continue 
a  member  of  it,  in  good  faith? 

A.  I  did,  sir. 


Q.  Have  you  volunteered  to  give  evidence 
in  this  matter? 

A.  The  first  I  knew  of  it  was  when  an 
officer  came  after  me  to  attend  this  Court. 

Q.  State  when  you  were  first  admitted  to 
the  Order  of  American  Knights,  and  where. 

A.  I  think  it  was  about  the  1st  of  July, 
1863,  I  was  initiated  in  the  congregation 
formed  in  the  timber  at  a  place  called 
Pearce's  Grove,  Warren  county,  by  a  man 
by  the  name  of  Griffith,  and  by  a  Dr. 
McCartney.  They  resided  at  Monmouth, 
Illinois. 

Q.  Can  you  give  to  this  Commission  the 
obligation  you  took  upon  yourself? 

A.  I  could  not  repeat  it  by  heart. 

Q.  Can  you  remember  the  substance  of 
that  obligation? 

A.  I  remember  some  of  it;  it  was  in  print. 

Q.  Have  you  a  copy  of  the  ritual  or  obli 
gation  about  you? 

A.   [After  a  pause.]     Yes,  sir. 

The  witness  here  produced  a  pamphlet 
from  his  pocket,  which  he  handed  to  the 
Judge  Advocate. 

Q.  What  does  this  capital  letter  V.,  on 
the  title,  mean? 

A.  I  don't  like  to  tell,  sir. 

Q.  But  you  must  tell  this  Commission, 
sir? 

A.   "Vestibule,"  sir,  I  suppose. 

The  pamphlet  or  ritual  referred  to,  was 
then  introduced  in  evidence  by  the  Judge 
Advocate. 

Q.  Turn  to  the  obligation  or  oath  taken 
by  those  initiated  into  the  order. 

A.  It  is  on  page  7. 

The  obligation  was  here  read  to  the 
Court  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  and  is  as  fol 
lows? 

I ,  in  the  presence  of  God,  and  many 

witnesses,  do  solemnly  declare  that  I  do 
herein  freely,  and  in  the  light  of  a  good 
conscience,  renew  the  solemn  vows  which  I 
plighted  in  the  V .  I  do  further  prom 
ise  that  I  will  never  reveal  nor  make  known 
to  any  man,  woman  or  child,  any  thing 
which  my  eyes  may  behold,  or  any  word 
which  my  ears  may  hear  within  this  sacred 

T [temple],  or  in  any  other  T ,  nor 

in  any  other  place  where  the  brotherhood 
may  be  assembled.  That  I  will  never  speak 
of,  nor  intimate,  any  purpose  or  purposes  of 
this  order,  whether  contemplated  or  deter 
mined,  to  any  one,  except  to  a  brother  of 
this  order,  whom  1  know  to  be  such.  That 
I  will  never  exhibit  any  or  either  of  the 
emblems  or  insignia  of  the  order,  except  by 
express  authority  granted  to  that  end,  and 
that  I  will  never  explain  their  use  or  signi 
fication  to  any  one  not  a  brother  of  this  or 
der,  whom  I  know  to  be  such,  under  any 
pretense  whatsoever,  neither  by  persuasion 
nor  by  coercion.  That  I  will  never  reveal 
nor  make  known  to  any  man,  woman  or 
child,  any  or  either  of  the  signs,  hails,  pass 
words,  watchwords,  initials,  nor  initial  let- 


40 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


ters,  belonging  to  this  order,  neither  by 
voice  nor  by  gesture,  attitude,  or  motion  of 
the  body,  nor  any  member  of  the  body ;  nor 
by  intimation  through  the  instrumentality 
of  any  thing  animate  or  inanimate,  or  ob 
ject  in  the  heavens  or  on  the  earth,  or 
above  the  earth,  except  to  prove  a  man  if 
he  be  a  brother,  or  to  communicate  with 


toward  my  fellow  men,  and  especially 
toward  the  brotherhood,  as  becometh  a  true 
man.  I  do  further  promise  that,  should  I 
cease  to  be  a  member  of  this  order,  either 
of  my  own  volition,  or  by  expulsion,  I  will 
hold  and  preserve  inviolate  my  solemn 
vows  and  promises  herein  declared,  as  well 
as  while  I  am  in  full  fellowship.  All  this  I 


brother  whom  I  shall  have  first  duly  proved  I  do  solemnly  promise  and  swear  sacredly  to 


or  know  to  be  such.  That  I  will  never  pro 
nounce  the  name  of  this  order,  in  the  hear 
ing  of  any  man,  woman  or  child,  except  to 
a  brother  of  this  order,  whom  I  know  to  be 
such.  I  do  further  promise  that  I  will  ever 
have  in  most  holy  keeping,  each  and  every 
secret  of  this  order,  which  may  be  confided 
to  me  by  a  brother,  either  within  or  with 
out  the  T ,  and  rather  than  reveal  which, 

I  will  consent  to  any  sacrifice,  even  unto 
death  by  torture.  I  do  further  promise  that  I 
will  never  recommend  for  membership  of 
this  order,  any  man  who  is  not  a  citizen  of 
an  American  State,  except  by  dispensation 
to  that  end,  by  the  competent  authority  of 
the  order — citizenship  always  resulting  from 
nativity,  or  from  due  process  of  law  in  such 
case  provided — neither  any  person  who  has 
not  attained  the  age  of  twenty-one  years, 
neither  a  man  unsound  or  infirm  in  body  or 
in  mind — such  as  a  cripple  or  an  idiot; 
neither  any  one  of  African  descent,  whether 
slave  or  free  man ;  neither  an  avowed  and 
acknowledged  atheist;  neither  a  person  of 
bad  repute.  I  do  further  promise  that  I 
will  ever  cherish  toward  each,  and  every 
member  of  this  order,  fraternal  regard  and 
fellowship;  that  I  will  ever  aid  a  worthy 
brother,  in  distress,  if  in  my  power  to  do  so; 
that  I  will  never  do  wrong,  knowingly,  to  a 
brother,  nor  permit  him  to  suffer  wrong  at 
the  hand  of  another,  if  it  shall  be  in  my 
power  to  warn  him  of  danger,  or  prevent 
the  wrong.  I  do  further  promise  that  I 
will,  at  all  times,  if  need  be,  take  up  arms 
in  the  cause  of  the  oppressed — in  my  country 
first  of  all — against  any  monarch,  prince, 
potentate,  power  or  government  usurped, 
which  may  be  found  in  arms  and  waging 
war  against  a  people,  or  peoples,  who  are 
endeavoring  to  establish,  or  have  inaugu 
rated,  a  government  for  themselves,  of  their 
own  free  choice,  in  accordance  with,  and 
founded  upon,  the  eternal  principles  of  Truth  ! 

which  I  have  first  sworn  in  the  V ,  and 

now  in  this  presence  do  swear  to  maintain 
inviolate,  and  defend  with  my  life.  This  I 
do  promise,  without  reservation  or  evasion 
of  mind,  without  regard  to  the  name,  sta 
tion,  condition,  or  designation  of  the  invad 
ing  or  coercing  power,  whether  it  shall  arise 
within  or  come  from  without!  1  do  further 
promise  that  I  will  always  recognize  and  re 
spond  to  the  hail  of  a  brother,  when  it  shall 
be  made  in  accordance  with  the  instruc 
tions  and  injunctions  of  this  order,  and  not 
otherwise.  I  do  further  promise  that,  with 
God's  help,  I  will  ever  demean  myself 


observe,  perform,  and  keep,  with  a  full 
knowledge  and  understanding,  and  with 
my  full  assent,  that  the  penalty  which  will 
follow  a  violation  of  any,  or  either,  of  these 
my  solemn  vows  will  be  a  sudden  and  shameful 
death!  while  my  name  shall  be  consigned  to 
infamy,  while  this  sublime  order  shall  sur 
vive  the  wrecks  of  time,  and  even  until  the 
last  faithful  brother  shall  have  passed  from 
earth  to  his  service  in  the  Temple  not  made 
with  hands!  Divine  Essence!  and  ye  men 
of  earth !  witness  the  sincerity  of  my  soul 
touching  these  my  vows!  Help  me,  God! 
Amen!  Amen!  Amen! 

Q.  Was  this  the  obligation  of  the  mem 
bers  of  the  Order  of  American  Knights? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  of  the  first  degree.  I  took 
the  second  degree  some  time  during  the 
fall  or  winter,  and  the  third  degree  in  the 
spring  of  1864,  I  believe. 

Q.  What  was  the  name  of  the  order  into 
which  you  were  initiated  ? 

A.  I  took  one  degree  in  the  Order  of 
American  Knights,  and  also  the  second  de 
gree,  and  before  I  took  the  third  degree  it 
was  changed  to  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of 
Liberty. 

Q.  When  and  by  whom  was  that  change 
made? 

A.  I  was  informed  by  the  officers  of  the 
order  that  the  change  was  made  in  New 
York,  about  the  22d  of  last  February. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  at  whose  instigation  the 
change  was  made  ? 

A.  The  ancient  brother  of  the  Grand 
Temple  stated  to  me,  that  it  was  made  by 
Mr.  Vallandigham,  or  in  consequence  of  a 
suggestion  from  him. 

Q.  Were  you  then  initiated  into  the  Or 
der  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty? 

A.  Only  into  the  third  degree.  The  other 
vows  in  the  Order  of  American  Knights 
were  considered  binding  in  the  Order  of  the 
Sons  of  Liberty. 

Q.  Did  all  these  members  who  belonged 
to  the  Order  of  American  Knights,  become 
members  of  the  Order  of  Sons  of  Liberty, 
by  virtue  of  taking  the  obligations  of  the 
former  order? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  All  who  had  taken  the  third 
degree.  They  moved  right  along  with  the 
same  officers,  and  were  controlled  by  the 
same  orders. 

Q.  When  did  you  take  the  third  degree 
and  become  a  member  of  the  Sons  of  Lib 
erty?  -. 

A.  It  was  in  the  spring;  about  March. 

Q.  Have  you  continued,  up  to  the  time  of 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


41 


receiving  the  summons  to  attend  this  Com 
mission,  to  be  a  member  of  good  standing? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  I  am  so  considered.  I  have 
never  been  expelled. 

Q.  When  and  where  did  you  meet  ? 

A.  We  had  a  tolerably  poor  temple ;  we 
met  in  the  woods  generally ;  we  had  meet 
ings  once  a  month. 

Q.  When  did  you  last  meet  with  them? 

A.  I  guess  it  was  two  weeks  ago  to-mor 
row. 

Q.  What  meeting  was  that  ? 

A.  It  was  a  meeting  of  the  township  tem 
ple. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  meet  in  the  Grand  Coun 
cil? 

A.  I  never  did. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hold  any  office  in  the  or 
ganization? 

A.  I  was  lecturer  of  the  Vestibule. 

Q.  What  was  the  general  principle  and 
aim  of  the  organization  ? 

A.  In  the  first  place  it  was  organized — at 
least  it  was  so  reported  to  us — for  the  pur 
pose  of  bringing  the  Democratic  party  to 
gether,  shoulder  to  shouldo^so  that,  by  such 
an  organization,  they  might  defeat  the  other 
party,  if  possible.  It  was  at  first  reported 
to  be  a  political  organization.  Afterward 
we  were  informed  by  the  officers,  that  it 
was  a  military  organization. 

Q.  What  service  were  they  going  to  per 
form? 

A.  They  mentioned  a  great  many  differ 
ent  purposes — one  of  them  was  that  the 
authorities  who  have  control  of  our  Gov 
ernment  were  tyrannical;  that  we  were 
being  trampled  under  foot;  and  that  we 
should  have^  to  stand  in  defense  of  our 
rights. 

Q.  Was  it  in  contemplation  to  resist  the 
Government  authorities  ? 

A.  No  time  was  set  to  my  knowledge. 

Q.  Was  it  talked  of? 

A.  It  was  reported  frequently  by  the  offi 
cers,  that  if  they  did  not  work  right,  when 
we  got  regularly  organized,  that  there  would 
be  a  time  set  to  rise,  and  maintain  our 
rights. 

Q.  What  was  the  plan? 

A.  I  can  not  say  that  the  plan  was  ever 
developed  to  me;  but  so  far  as  it  was  devel 
oped,  and  I  understood  it,  it  was,  that  force 
of  arms  was  to  be  resorted  to,  and  that  we 
should  have  to  fight  for  our  rights. 

Q.  Did  not  these  "rights"  contemplate 
the  overthrow  of  the  Government  by  force 
of  arms? 

A.  I  would  rather  consider  it  that  way. 

Q.  Did  the  order  have  any  drilling? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  drill  ? 

A.  Frequently,  sir. 

Q.  How  often? 

A.  I  could  not  state  the  number  of  times. 

Q.  How  many  times  in  a  month  did  they 
drill? 


A.  Sometimes  once,  sometimes  twice  a 
month. 

Q.  How  long  is  it  since  you  commenced 
to  drill  ? 

A.  About  a  year  ago,  in  June.  We  have 
been  drilling  on  and  off  for  a  year. 

Q.  Did  you  get  pretty  well  drilled  ? 

A.  Pretty  well,  sir;  but  we  had  no  great 
drill  master. 

Q.  To  what  extent  was  this  organization 
that  you  belonged  to  armed  ? 

A.  I  could  not  tell  exactly.  Most  of  the 
arms  we  had  were  pistols. 

Q.  In  your  township,  to  what  extent  were 
the  members  of  the  organization  armed? 

A.  I  guess  about  two-thirds  were  armed? 

Q.  Is  that  a  fair  average  of  the  arming  of 
the  organization,  as  far  as  you  know? 

A.  I  think  it  is,  sir. 

Q.  How  many  members  were  there  in 
your  township? 

A.  The  muster  roll  numbered  one  hun 
dred  and  odd.  Two-thirds  of  that  number 
were  armed  with  revolvers,  shot-guns  or 
rifles. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  extensive  the  or 
ganization  in  Illinois  was? 

A.  I  could  only  learn  through  the  officers 
of  the  Grand  Lodge,  in  their  returns  to  the 
Grand  Council,  and  according  to  their  re 
ports  it  was  over  one  hundred  thousand  in 
that  State. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  how  many  could  be  re 
lied  upon,  in  a  military  point  of  view,  in 
case  of  insurrection? 

A.  Mr.  McCartney,  who  was  the  Grand 
Seignior,  informed  me  that  there  were  forty 
thousand  in  the  State  well  armed,  and 
they  could  depend  upon  eighty  thousand 
in  the  State  of  Illinois. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  the  strength  of  the  or 
ganization  in  the  State  of  Indiana? 

A.  I  learned  from  the  reports  of  officers 
of  our  temple,  that  they  were  about  eighty 
thousand  in  the  State  of  Indiana,  but  1  did 
not  learn  how  many  were  armed  here  ? 

Q.  Did  you  learn  the  strength  of  the  or 
der  in  Missouri  ? 

A.  That  there  were  between  thirty  and 
forty  thousand.  Twenty  thousand  of  them 
were  in  St.  Louis  and  the  vicinity. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  any  plans,  or  dis 
cussions  of  any  plans,  among  members  of 
the  order,  or  of  the  officers,  to  assist  the 
rebels  in  case  of  the  invasion  of  Missouri, 
or  of  assisting  them  by  moving  into  Ken 
tucky? 

A.  I  heard  some  talk  of  that  kind.  We 
were  informed  in  the  vicinity  where  I  live, 
that  sometime  between  May  and  June, 
probably,  that  there  was  to  be  an  invasion 
at  three  different  points.  One  was  to  be 
into  Ohio,  one  into  Indiana,  and  another  into 
Illinois. 

Q.  By  whom? 

A.  If  I  mistake  not.  Forrest  was  to  lead 
the  one  in  Illinois ;  Wheeler  or  Morgan,  or 


42 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


some  of  those  men,  in  Indiana ;  Longstreet 
was  to  make  for  Ohio  while  Marmaduke  or 
Price  (some  said  one  and  some  another)  was 
to  come  into  Missouri.  It  was  early  in  the 
spring  that  this  news  reached  us. 

Q.  Was  it  in  contemplation  that  the  or 
der  should  rise  and  assist  these  men,  when 
they  invaded  these  States? 

A.  I  think  the  understanding  was  that 
in  case  the  rebels  came  over  into  Illinois, 
they  and  the  brethren  of  this  organization 
were  to  shake  hands  and  be  friends. 

Q.  Were  they  to  receive  aid  and  assist 
ance  from  this  order  ? 

A.  I  should  consider  it  that  way,  sir. 

Q.  DC  you  know  of  any  assessments  upon 
this  order  for  money,  with  which  arms  were 
to  be  purchased  for  the  organization? 

A.  I  do  not  know  of  any  assessments 
made  by  the  Grand  Council;  but  I  know  an 
assessment  was  made  by  the  temples.  An 
assessment  was  to  be  made  by  all  the  county 
temples,  and  an  assessment  was  made  by 
our  lodge  to  the  amount  of  $200. 

Q.  Was  it  paid? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  was  done  with  the 
money? 

A.  A  man  who  passed  by  the  name  of  J. 
A.  Barrett,  or  Colonel  Barrett,  of  St  Louis, 
was  appointed  to  receive  the  money.  He 
stated  that  he  was  traveling  round  through 
the  State  to  receive  money  to  pay  transpor 
tation  on  the  arms  that  were  engaged  for 
the  order. 

Q.  What  arms  were  engaged  for  the  or 
der,  and  where  were  they  to  come  from? 


of  the  order  with  Mr.  Griffith.  The  sub 
stance  of  it  was  that  I  had  my  doubts  in 
regard  to  the  order  being  able  to  stand  up 
and  maintain  what  they  were  undertaking. 
He  did  not  seem  to  have  any  doubt  about 
being  able  to  gain  their  point — that  is,  as 
to  whether  they  would  be  successful  or 
not. 

Q.  Was  this  order  both  civil  and  mili 
tary? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Had  you  captains,  colonels  and  gen 
erals  in  your  organization  ? 

A.  Only  captains  and  colonels  that  1 
knew  of.  There  was  an  act  passed,  that 
there  should  be  a  colonel  to '  each  county, 
and  a  brigadier  general  for  each  Congress 
ional  district.  That  act  was  passed  by  the 
Grand  Council  of  the  State:  they  made  the 
laws  for  the  order. 

Q.  What  did  you  understand  were  to  be 
the  penalties  for  divulging  the  secrets  of 
the  order? 

A.  The  obligation  there  says  death,  and 
that  was  understood  to  be  the  penalty. 

Q,  Did  you  ever  know  any  person  who 
divulged,  or  who  was  reported  to  have  di 
vulged  the  secrets  of  the  order? 

A.  I  do  not  know  of  any  myself,  but 
there  were  some  who  were  said  to  have  di 
vulged  them. 


Q. 

A. 


What  was  done  in  the  matter? 

They   probably   decided  that  it  was  a 


compulsory  move,  and  they  did  not  attempt 
to  do  any  thing.  1  heard  that  there  were 
a  number  who  had  joined  the  order  ar 
rested  at  Richmond,  Indiana,  on  their  way 
A.  The  arms  were  to  come  from  Nassau  to  Ohio,  and  that  the  Provost  Marshal,  or 


to  Canada,  and  the  understanding  was  that 
they  were  to  be  brought  to  the  line  in 
Canada  by  the  authorities  of  the  Confeder 
ate  States,  and  we  were  to  pay  the  cost  of 
transportation  on  them  from  Nassau  to 
that  point,  where  we  were  to  receive  them. 
If  we  got  them  home,  it  would  be  all  right, 
and  if  we  lost  them,  we  were  to  lose  what 
we  had  advanced. 

Q.  Do  you  know  any  thing  of  an  arrange 
ment,  in  which  Mr.  Vallandigham  was  to 
give  the  signal  for  the  rising  of  this  order? 

A.  I  heard  in  this  way,  that  all  the  or 
ders  would  be  issued  from  the  Head  De 
partment,  of  which  he  was  Supreme  Com 
mander,  and  that  orders  would  be  issued 
when  all  things  were  ready;  in  other  words, 
we  were  not  to  do  any  thing  till  the  com 
mand  was  given  by  Vallandigham,  who  was 
Supreme  Commander.  The  next  highest 
in  command  was  a  man  by  the  'name  of 
Holloway.  In  case  the  command  was  not 
given  by  Vallandigham,  the  word  would  be 
given  by  Holloway.  He  lives  in  Mercer 
county,  Illinois,  and  I  have  often  talked 
with  him. 

Q.  Did  (you  ever  talk  to  him  respecting 
the  order  ? 

A.  I  talked  in  regard  to  the  movements 


some  Government  officer,  got  the  secrets 
out  of  two  of  them,  but  it  was  claimed  that 
force  of  arms  had  been  used  and  weapons 
drawn  upon  them,  and  they  concluded  that 
they  had  to  tell. 

Q.  Were  any  inquiries  made  into  the 
matter,  or  any  court  convened? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  they  convened 
a  court,  or  that  any  inquiries  were  made  by 
the  order  to  find  out  the  particulars,  but  it 
was  understood  that  if  a  man  was  guilty 
of  exposing  the  secrets  of  the  order,  he 
would  be  tried  by  court-martial,  and  if 
found  guilty  he  would  pay  the  penalty. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  court-martial 
being  held? 

A.  No,  sir.  But  if  they  found  a  man 
guilty  of  betraying  the  secrets  of  the  order, 
if  the  court  decided  that  he  should  suffer 
death,  they  were  to  be  governed  by  that 
entirely. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  this  order  having  any 
connection  or  communication  with  the 
rebel  authorities? 

A.  I  saw  a  man  from  their  country,  and  I 
heard  from  members  of  the  order,  as  well 
as  outside  the  order,  that  he  belonged  to 
the  rebel  government. 

Q.  What  did  they  come  there  for? 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


43 


A.  I  could  not  positively  state  their  busi 
ness.  But  there  were  many  who  came  over 
backward  and  forward  from  Missouri,  whom 
I  saw,  living  as  I  did  near  the  Missouri  line, 
and  many  that  came  over,  I  guess,  had  been 
in  the  rebel  army. 

Q.  Was  there  any  communication  be 
tween  these  men  and  the  members  of  the 
order? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  the  members  or  officers  of  your 
organization  learn  of  the  contemplated 
rebel  movements  from  these  people  who 
crossed  from  Missouri? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  did  events  turn  out  as  your  order 
had  been  informed? 

A.  I  believe  they  did.  They  were  in 
formed  that  Price  would  invade  Missouri. 

Q.  Prior  to  his  coming,  were  the  mem 
bers  of  the  order  informed  of  his  coming? 

A.  I  was  informed  by  members  from 
Henderson  county  that  he  was  coming. 
A  person,  who  professed  to  be  one  of 
Quantrell's  men,  I  think,  informed  them 
that  Price  would  be  in  Missouri  toward  the 
first  of  October,  and  remain  there  till  after 
the  fall  election,  or  as  much  longer  as  he 
deemed  proper,  or  as  he  could. 

Q.  Was  any  effort  made  on  the  part  of 
these  emissaries  to  organize  and  assist  the 
rebels  when  they  should  come  into  the 
State,  as  you  have  detailed? 

A.  I  think  not,  sir. 

Q.  Was  it  not  part  of  their  general  plan 
to  assist  the  rebels,  whenever  they  invaded 
these  States? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  and  if  it  has  been  given  up  I 
do  not  know  it. 

Q.  Then  why  did  they  not  assist  Price 
when  he  came  into  Missouri? 

A.  I  can  not  tell;  but  the  order  is  not 
doing  much  business  in  that  State  of  late, 
from  the  exposures  made  in  this  State. 

Q.  Had  the  exposures  in  St.  Louis  any 
thing  to  do  in  stopping  the  operations  of 
the  order  in  Missouri  and  Illinois  ? 

A.  I  think,  sir,  it  had  a  great  deal. 

Q.  Are  they  still  keeping  up  their  or 
ganizations,  notwithstanding  these  expo 
sures? 

A.  The  military  organization  remains  the 
same,  but  they  have  not  drilled  any  since. 

Q.  How  do  these  men  that  come  from  the 
South  cross  the  river  to  get  into  Illinois? 

A.  I  have  been  informed  by  men  who  had 
lived  in  that  State,  that  they  had  crossed  at 
different  points.  One  point  was  near  Lou 
isiana,  Missouri. 

Q.  How  do  they  cross? 

A.  They  told  me  that  when  they  wanted 
to  cross,  and  they  could  not  hook  a  skiff, 
that  they  had  oil-cloth  so  fixed,  that  by 
cutting  willows  and  running  poles  into  them, 
they  could  soon  fix  up  a  skiff.  When  they 
crossed,  they  would  hide  the  oil-cloth  till 
they  wanted  to  return. 


Q.  Did  you  ever  belong  to  the  Order  of 
the  Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  I  did. 

Q.  When  did  you  join  that  order? 

A.  I  joined  that  before  this  Order  of  the 
Sons  of  Liberty.  It  was  in  1862,  I  guess. 

Q.  Where  did  you  join  that  order? 

A.  In  Jefferson  county.  I  was  down 
there  on  a  visit,  and  I  heard  a  great  deal 
of  talk  about  it,  and  a  gentleman  proposed 
to  give  me  the  organization  to  bring  up 
home  and  start  it,  but  I  did  not. 

Q.  Was  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty, 
or  Order  of  the  American  Knights,  a  con 
tinuation  of  the  Order  of  the  Knights  of 
the  Golden  Circle? 

A.  I  never  understood  that  it  was  so. 
The  Order  of  American  Knights  was  intro 
duced  in  our  county  in  June,  1863.  It  was 
at  the  time  of  the  mass  meeting  of  the 
Democratic  convention  at  Springfield,  Illi 
nois,  that  it  was  inaugurated  at  that  place. 
The  Grand  Council  was  inaugurated  there, 
and  the  Grand  Council  appointed  two  offi 
cers  to  each  county  to  promulgate  the  order, 
and  to  set  up  temples.  P.  C.  Wright,  who 
now,  I  believe,  has  an  interest  in  the  New 
York  News,  inaugurated  the  order. 

A  lithographed  circular  was  here  pro 
duced  by  the  witness. 

Q.  Where  did  you  get  this  circular? 

A.  It  was  first  showed  to  me  by  Dr. 
McCartney,  in  our  temple,  some  time  last 
winter. 

The  circular,  signed  P.  C.  Wright,  was 
here  introduced  into  evidence  by  the  Judge 
Advocate.  It  reads  as  follows: 


NEW  YORK  DAILY  NEWS,  ") 

Office,  19  City  Hall    Square,          V 

NEW  YORK,  January  18,  1804.  J 


Dear  Sir:  I  have  this  day  connected  my 
self  with  the  editorial  department  of  the 

New  York  News."  You  will  remember 
that  the  News  has,  from  the  first,  advocated 
the  principles  inculcated  by  Jefferson  and 
his  illustrious  compeers,  and  has  fearlessly 
and  openly  denounced  the  usurpations  of 
power  which  have  wrested  from  the  citizen 
his  cherished  rights,  and  thrown  down  the 
last  barrier  between  him  and  irresponsible 
despotism. 

The  News  will  be  our  especial  ore/an,  and 
will  be  a  medium  for  the  interchange  of 
sentiments  and  opinions  of  the  friends  of 
peace,  touching  the  momentous  concerns 
involved  in  the  existing  crisis. 

I  entreat  your  kind  offices  and  influence 
in  extending  the  circulation   of    the  News 
throughout  the  entire  field  of  our  labor. 
Yours  sincerely,  P.  C.  WRIGHT. 

Q.  Who  was  McCartney? 

A.  He  was  the  Grand  Seignior  in  the 
county  temple. 

Q.  Do  you  know  P.  C.  Wright,  and  what 
part  he  took  in  organizing  the  Order  of 
American  Knights? 

A.  He  organized  the  first  Grand  Council 


44 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


at  Springfield,  and  he  appointed  Grand 
Seignior  and  Ancient  Brethren  to  organize 
the  counties.  It  was  the  same  P.  C.  Wright, 
so  Dr.  McCartney  represented,  who  is  now 
connected  with  the  New  York  News. 

Q.  Can  you  give  to  this  Commission  the 
unwritten  part  of  the  order  up  to  the  third 
degree  ? 

A.  I  suppose  I  could,  but  I  do  not  like  to 
undertake  it. 

Q.  What  is  the  password  between  the 
members  ? 

A.  Each  county  has  its  own  passwords. 
The  password  of  our  county  was  Wash 
ington. 

Q.  How  was  it  given,  by  syllables  or  oth 
erwise? 

A.  It  was  spoken  right  out. 

Q.  How  did  you  recognize  each  other  on 
the  street? 

A.  We  would  generally  challenge  him, 
that  is  by  placing  myself  in  a  proper  position. 

Q.  Give  to  this  Commission  the  position 
by  which  you  challenged  a  member. 

The  witness  here  gave  some  of  the  chal 
lenges  and  tests  described  at  length  by 
the  witness  Stidger. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Monday,  October  3,  at  2  o'clock,  P.  M. 

COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         ) 
October  3, 1864,  2  o'clock,  P.  M.  ) 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment 

In  consequence  of  the  absence  of  a  mem 
ber,  the  Commission  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Tuesday,  October  4,  at  10  o'clock,  A.  M. 

COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,        ) 
October  4,  1864,  10  o'clock,  A.  M.j 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

Present — Brevet  Brigadier  General  Silas 
Colgrove,  Colonel  McLean.  Colonel  Thomas 
J.  Lucas,  Colonel  John  T.  \Vilder,  Colonel 
Charles  D.  Murray,  Colonel  Richard  P.  De 
Hart,  Major  H.  L.  Burnett,  Judge  Advocate; 
also  the  accused  and  his  counsel. 

Absent — Colonel  Benjamin  Spooner,  Col 
onel  Ambrose  A.  Stevens. 

The  Judge  Advocate  then  read  a  medical 
certificate,  excusing  Colonel  A.  A.  Stevens 
from  attendance  on  the  Commission.  Also, 
a  telegram  from  Colonel  Spooner,  stating 
his  inability  to  be  present  at  the  Commis 
sion;  both  of  which  were  ordered  to  be 
attached  to  the  record. 

By  consent  of  the  accused,  given  in  open 
Court,  it  was  agreed  that  the  record  of  pro 
ceedings  should  be  read,  and  any  nominal 
business  transacted,  and  that  the  absent 
members  should  take  their  seats  on  the 
Commission  when  they  arrived. 

The  proceedings  of  Friday,  September 
30,  were  read. 

Pending  the  reading  of  the  record,  the 
Commission  adjourned,  to  meet  at  2£  o'clock, 
P.  M 


AFTERNOON   SESSION. 

COUKT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         \ 
October  4,  1864,  2%  o'clock,  P.  M.  j 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

The  same  members  present  as  at  the 
morning  session  ;  also  the  Judge  Advocate, 
the  accused,  and  his  counsel. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Wednesday,  October  5,  at  10  o'clock, 
A.  M. 


COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         \ 
October  5,  1804,  10  o'clock,  A.  M.  J 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

All  the  members  present;  also  the  Judge 
Advocate,  the  accused,  and  his  counsel. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

William  Clayton,  a  witness  for  the  Gov 
ernment,  continued  his  testimony  as  fol 
lows  : 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate.  State 
whether  or  not  the  league  to  which  you  be 
longed,  sent  delegates  to  the  Chicago  Con 
vention,  or  to  the  Chicago  Grand  Council, 
that  met  in  that  city  in  July  last. 

A.  The  temple  to  which  I  belonged  was 
subordinate  to  the  county  temple.  I  be 
longed  to  the  organization  in  Eoseville 
township.  The  W'arren  county  temple  sent 
delegates  to  the  Grand  Council  for  the 
State  of  Illinois. 

Q,  Did  you  learn  any  thing  of  the  doings 
or  designs  of  the  Grand  Council,  or  the  re 
turn  of  the  delegates? 

A.  Not  a  great  deal.  I  was  at  the  War 
ren  county  temple  at  Momnouth,  and  Mr. 
Griffith  and  McCarthy,  who  were  officers 
of  that  temple,  had  been  to  the  Chicago 
Grand  Council.  They  spoke  of  the  Mili 
tary  Committee.  The  Grand  Commander 
of  the  State,  they  said,  had  the  selecting 
and  appointing  of  the  Military  Committee 
in  the  State.  That  committee  was  not 
known  to  any  person  whatever,  except  to 
the  Grand  Commander. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  what  that  was? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  did  not.  The  committee 
reported  to  the  Grand  Commander  all  their 
proceedings,  and  such  a  part  as  he  thought 
proper  he  reported  to  the  Grand  Council. 

Q.  Did  you,  after  the  Chicago  Conven 
tion,  hear  any  thing  about  the  obligation  of 
secrecy  being  removed? 

A.  No,  sir,  I  did  not ;  I  never  heard  any 
thing  of  it  till  I  saw  it  in  the  newspa 
pers.* 

Q.  Was  that  the  first  time  you,  as  a  mem 
ber  of  the  order,  heard  of  the  obligation 
of  secrecy  being  removed? 

A.  It  was. 


*  The  Indianapolis  Sentinel  had  stated,  -a  few  days  previ 
ous,  that  the  obligation  of  secrecy  was  removed  during 
the  session  of  the  Grand  Council,  at  Chicago. 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


45 


CROSS-EXAMIXATION. 

Was  initiated  a  member  of  the  Order  of 
American  Knights  on  the  17th  day  of 
June,  1863.  The  first  knowledge  witness 
had  of  the  order,  was  at  the  time  of  the 
meeting  of  the  Grand  Council,  at  Spring 
field,  Illinois.  It  was  organized  at  the  mass 
convention,  at  which  he  was  present.  Mr. 
Griffith  and  Mr.  McCartney  were  appointed 
to  organize  the  county  temple.  The  town 
ship  temple  was  organized  shortly  after.  It 
was  organized  in  the  timber,  about  two  and 
a  half  miles  from  his  residence;  about 
thirty,  or  more,  were  present  at  the  first 
meeting.  There  was  no  drilling  at  the  first 
meeting,  but  was  not  positive  but  that 
there  was  some  drilling  before  the  organi 
zation  of  the  order;  such  drilling  as  there 
might  have  been,  was  not  under  the  laws 
of  the  State  of  Illinois.  The  only  object 
in  drilling,  witness  knew  of,  was  that  the 
knowledge  acquired  was  to  be  used  for  any 
thing  that  might  come  up.  They  had  been 
informed  that  the  Government  was  resort 
ing  to  tyrannical  measures,  and  there  might 
probably  come  a  time  when  they  would 
have  to  stand  in  defense  of  their  rights. 
They  were  afraid  the  Government  might 
crowd  them,  and  there  had  been  talk  of 
conscription,  and  they  were  arming,  organi 
zing,  and  drilling,  to  resist  the  conscription, 
or  any  thing  else  that  pushed  them  too 
hard.  The  company  to  which  witness  be 
longed,  numbered  one  hundred  and  up 
ward.  They  generally  carried  their  arms 
to  drill.  One  of  their  drill  masters  was 
William  F.  George.  He  lived  in  Hoseville 
township,  Warren  county.  There  were 
also  one  or  two  men,  officers,  who  were 
present  at  one  or  two  drills.  One  was  a 
captain,  and  the  other  a  colonel.  The  col 
onel  was  said  to  live  in  Knox  county, 
near  Augusta.  They  had  been  in  the  army, 
but  were  discharged.  Supposed  they  were 
loyal.  Four  or  five  companies  were  present 
at  the  drill,  which  took  place  in  an  open 
prairie  bottom.  They  did  not  become  very 
well  drilled.  Witness  was  a  private,  and 
Mr.  Johnson  or  Mr.  Riggs  was  first  lieu 
tenant. 

Did  not  know,  of  his  own  knowledge, 
that  the  purpose  of  the  organization  of  the 
order  in  other  States  was  resistance  to  the 
Government.  Was  informed  by  officers  of 
the  Warren  county  temple,  that  Missouri, 
Illinois,  Indiana  and  Ohio  were  so  organized; 
and  at  first  it  was  reported,  that  several 
of  the  Eastern  States  had  gone  into  the  or 
ganization  with  the  same  object,  and  could 
be  relied  on,  but  that  afterward  it  was 
found  that  only  the  four  States  named 
had  gone  thoroughly  into  the  organization, 
and  that  those  only  could  be  relied  upon. 

There  was  a  meeting  of  the  Supreme 
Council  of  the  United  States,  in  New  York, 
on  the  22d  of  February,  and  it  was  after 


this  meeting  that  the  Grand  Seignior  of  the 
Warren  county  temple  said  he"  was  afraid 
that  the  States  east  of  Ohio  could  not  be 
depended  upon,  in  case  of  an  outbreak 
against  the  Government. 

Question  by  the  accused: 

Was  it  the  purpose  of  those  who  crossed 
over  from  the  South,  as  you  have  stated, 
that  you  should  help  the  rebels  in  case  of 
an  outbreak? 

A.  I  considered  it  that  way. 

Q.  From  whom  did  you  learn  this? 

A.  From  a  member  of  the  Order  of  the 
American  Knights  or  Sons  of  Liberty. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  talk  with  any  man  from, 
the  South  in  regard  to  helping  the  Southern 
rebellion? 

A.  I  do  not  wish  to  answer  that  question. 
I  will  answer  or  not,  as  the  Judge  Advo 
cate  decides. 

The  Judge  Advocate  informed  the  wit 
ness  that  he  must  answer  every  question 
put  by  the  counsel  for  the  accused,  if  the 
answer  did  not  criminate  himself. 

A.  I  have  been  asked  by  men,  who  said 
their  homes  were  in  the  South  or  in  Mis 
souri,  if  we  had  any  intention  to  assist  them 
in  case  they  came  over  into  Illinois. 

Q.  Well,  and  what  did  you  tell  them? 

A.  That  I  presumed  a  great  many  would, 
and  some  would  not  assist  them. 

Q.  What  did  you  say  you  would  do? 

A.  I  did  not  tell  them  whether  I  would 
help  them  or  not. 

Q.  Now,  I  wish  to  ask  you  what  you 
would  have  done  if  the  rebels  had  come 
into  Illinois? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate,  and  withdrawn. 

Q.  What  did  your  society  or  temple  re 
solve  to  do,  in  case  of  an  invasion  from  Mis 
souri  by  the  rebels? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  our  temple  ever 
passed  any  resolution  that  they  would  as 
sist  the  &9uth;  we  only  talked  of  it  at  our 
meetings. 

Q.  What  did  you  consider  you  had  sworn 
to  when  you  took  this  obligation? 

The  counsel  then  read  the  following  from 
the  obligation  of  the  first  degree  of  the 
Order  of  American  Knights: 

"I  do  further  promise,  that  I  will,  at  all 
times,  if  need  be,  take  up  arms  in  the  cause 
of  the  oppressed — in  my  country  first  of 
all — against  any  monarch,  prince,  potentate, 
power,  or  government  usurped,  which  may 
be  found  in  arms,  and  waging  war  against  a 
people  or  peoples  who  are  endeavoring  to 
establish,  or  have  inaugurated  a  govern 
ment  for  themselves  of  their  own  free 
choice,  in  accordance  with  and  founded 
upon  the  eternal  principles  of  truth,  which 

I  have  sworn  in  the  V ,  and  now  in  this 

presence  do  swear,  to  maintain  inviolate, 
and  defend  with  my  life." 

Q.  What  did  you  consider  you  had  sworn 
to  maintain  inviolate? 


46 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


A.  I  considered  that  obligation  bound  us 
to  assist  the  South,  as  they  were  trying  to 
free  themselves  and  form  a  government  of 
their  own  free  choice. 

Q.  Do  you  still  hold  that  this  obligation 
is  binding  on  you? 

A.  I  have  taken  it  on  myself,  and  I  con 
sider  that  it  is. 

Q.  You  are  sworn  to  help  the  South,  then, 
are  you  ? 

A.  That  is  the  way  I  read  the  obligation. 

Q.  Were  the  army,  then,  that  you  were 
organizing,  and  the  men  under  the  control 
of  the  order,  all  bound  by  this  obligation? 

A.  I  do  not  know,  of  my  own  knowledge, 
that  they  were. 

Q.  Had  all  these  men  who  were  drilling 
taken  the  Vestibule  degree  obligation? 

A.  I  do  not  think  they  had,  sir.  Some 
of  those  who  were  drilling,  were  not  mem 
bers  of  the  order. 

Q.  Did  they  know  of  the  general  pur 
pose  of  the  organization  drilling,  and  that 
it  was  in  pursuance  of  this  obligation  ? 

A.  I  think  they  did  not. 

Q.  How  did  you  come  to  permit  these 
men  to  drill  with  you? 

A.  We  took  every  man  who  was  disposed 
to  fall  in  and  drill  with  us,  and  said  nothing 
about  our  ulterior  purposes. 

Q.  Did  you  not  consider  that  portion  of 
the  obligation  which  speaks  of  "  the  op 
pressed,"  to  refer  to  the  negroes  enslaved? 

A.  I  did  not  put  that  construction  on  it. 

Q.  What  did  you  consider  the  phrase, 
"the  oppressed — in  my  country  first  of 
all" — to  imply? 

A.  I  understood  it  that  the  people  of  the 
South  were  oppressed,  and  were  trying 
to  establish  a  government  of  their  own 
choice. 

Q.  What  was  meant  by  the  phrase  "pow 
er  and  Government  usurped,  which  may  be 
found  in  arms?" 

A.  I  will  tell  you  how  I  understood  it.  It 
referred  to  the  Government  and  the  armv 
of  the  United  States. 

Q.  It  was  against  them,  then,  that  you 
were  organized  to  wage  a  war  ? 

A.  We  were  to  wage  war  upon  them,  of 
course,  if  they  took  up  arms  against  the 
South. 

Q.  Did  you  think  that  the  government 
referred  to,  was  the  government  of  the 
whole  South  ? 

A.  That  was  the  opinion  where  I  lived. 

Q.  Do  you  swear  that  that  it  was  the  in 
tention  of  the  order  generally? 

A.  I  don't  know  as  it  was,  and  I  have 
never  traveled  over  other  States  to  learn 
how  they  considered  it,  nor  conversed  with 
members  elsewhere  about  it. 

Q.  Did  you  not  state  the  other  day,  in 
your  exam i nation-in-chief,  that  you  were  to 
meet  the  Southern  army  if  they  invaded 
the  North,  and  shake  hands  with  them? 

A.  It  was   the  understanding,   where   I 


lived,  that  in  case  of  an  invasion,  we  were 
to  shake  hands  with  them  and  be  friends. 

Q.  Was  that  the  understanding  as  to  the 
relations  of  the  order  to  them? 

A.  It  was,  as  far  as  my  knowledge  ex 
tends,  in  our  section. 

Q.  You  were  willing,  then,  to  shake,  hands 
with  the  invaders  of  the  North,  and  be 
friends  with  them  ? 

A.  This  was  the  sentiment  in  the  section 
where  I  lived. 

Q,  Did  this  sentiment  extend  beyond  the 
order  ? 

A.  I  think  some  outside  of  the  order  felt 
the  same  way. 

Q.  You  did  not  think  it  wrong,  then,  to 
welcome  them  as  friends  ? 

A.  I  never  understood  any  thing  about 
the  right  or  wrong  of  the  case.  Of  the  two 
evils  we  were  to  choose  the  least. 

Q,  What  two  evils  did  you  consider  it  the 
least  of? 

A.  The  independence  of  the  South  or 
submission  to  the  oppression  of  the  Admin 
istration.  In  our  section  we  considered 
the  success  of  the  South  the  least  evil. 

Q,  Were  you  in  favor  of  it  against  the 
Government  of  the  United  States  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  still  maintain  that  feeling  in 
your  lodges  there  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  At  the  meeting  I  attended 
three  weeks  ago,  we  were  pledged  to  that 
faith. 

Q.  How  did  you  come  to  leave  home  and 
come  here  ? 

A.  I  was  brought  here  by  the  Provost 
Marshal.  A  subpena  was  served  on  me,  in 
structing  me  to  come  here. 

Q.  Were  you  arrested,  and  then  sub- 
pen  aed? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  was  brought  here,  and  wras 
ignorant  as  to  what  I  was  subpenaed  for. 

Q.  Did  the  Government  promise  you  that 
you  would  be  protected  against  prosecution, 
if  you  testified  against  the  order? 

A.  I  have  received  no  assurances  of  that 
kind,  except  what  I  had  here  to-day  in  court 
from  the  Judge  Advocate. 

Q.  Did  you  testify  without  fear  or  favor? 

A.  I  had  fears,  but  not  of  this  court. 

Q.  What  were  you  in  fear  of? 

A.  1  have  had  fears  that  I  would  be  ar- 

|  rested  when  I  got  home,  on  the  strength  of 

the  testimony  I  have  given  here;  and  also 

have  had  fears  about  the  dealings  with  me 

of  the  organization  to  which  I  belong. 

Q.  Did  you  not  tell  General  Carrington 
that  you  would  be  ruined  at  home  on  ac 
count  of  your  testimony? 

A.  I  may  have  told  him  so. 

Q.  Why  did  you  expect  it  would  ruin 
you? 

A.  I  supposed  it  would  so  far  as  the  order 
i  extends ;  for  its  members  are  all  under  the 
!  same  obligation  that  I  have  taken. 

Q.  Why  do  you  make  this  exposure  of 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


47 


the  order,  after  taking  that  obligation  to 
keep  it  a  secret  ? 

A.  I  have  testified  before  this  Court  vol 
untarily,  because  the  law  makes  it  my  duty 
to  tell  the  truth;  and  as  an  honest  and 
truthful  man,  I  mean  to  tell  the  truth,  and 
nothing  else. 

Q.  You  preferred  telling  the  truth,  then, 
and  exposing  the  order,  rather  than  keeping 
your  obligation  not  to  reveal  the  secrets  of 
the  order? 

A.  I  considered  this  a  lawful  tribunal,  and 
have  spoken  the  whole  truth. 

Q.  Do  you  not  consider  the  order  a  lawful 
organization  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  I  do  not. 

Q.  Then  you  regard  the  laws  of  the  land 
and  of  this  Government  as  preferable  to 
assisting  the  Confederacy  ? 

A.  I  regard  my  obligations  to  the  laws  of 
the  land  first  of  all,  to  speak  the  truth,  and 
I  wish,  so  far  as  in  me  lies,  to  respect  and 
obey  the  laws. 

Q.  Have  you  had  any  inducement  held 
out  to  you  to  expose  this  order  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  What  made  you  do  it  ? 

A.  Because  1  was  brought  before  this 
Court,  and  I  could  not  refuse  to  tell  the 
truth  without  being  false  to  the  oath  I  took 
here. 

Q.  Could  you  not  back  up  on  your 
rights? 

A.  Had  I  been  a  lawyer,  I  might  have 
done  so. 

Q.  Did  you  not  do  so  this  morning? 

A.  I  said  that  I  would  not  answer  unless  I 
was  so  directed  by  the  Judge  Advocate. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  if  you  had  been 
asked  any  question  that  would  lead  you  to 
criminate  yourself,  that  you  could  not  be 
compelled  to  answer  it  ? 

A.  I  have  never  been  before  a  military 
court  before ;  I  am  no  lawyer,  only  a  farmer, 
and  a  poor  one  at  that ;  and  I  don't  know 
the  custom  of  military  courts. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate: 

When  I  saw  you  in  my  room,  did  I,  or  did 
I  not,  inform  you  that  you  were  to  speak 
the  exact  truth,  and  that  without  any  fear, 
favor  or  affection  ? 

A.  You  did,  sir. 

Q.  And  without  any  hope  of  fee  or  re 
ward,  or  offer  of  any,  in  any  way  whatever  ; 
and  that  all  the  truth  must  be  spoken  with 
out  any  swerving  or  prevarication  ? 

A.  You  did,  sir.  I  felt  considerably  em 
barrassed,  and  when  I  saw  you  at  your  of 
fice,  you  spoke  to  me  as  you  did  here. 

Q.  Was  there  any  thing  said  except  as  to 
the  desire  of  the  Government  to  get  at  the 
clear,  unvarnished  truth  ? 

A.  That  was  all,  sir. 

Q.  And  what  brought  you  here  to-day  ? 

A.  The  sub£>ena    from  this    Commission 


was  served  upon  me,  and  I  had  to  come  and 
testify  as  I  have  done. 

TESTIMONY    OF    WESLEY   TRANTER. 

Wesley  Tranter,  a  witness  for  the  Govern 
ment,  being  duly  sworn,  in  answer  to  inter 
rogatories  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified 
as  follows : 

My  home  is  at  Shoal's  Station,  Martin 
county,  Indiana,  and  am  a  miller  by  trade. 
I  have  not  lived  at  Shoal's  Station  since  I 
informed  on  this  Butternut  organization  in 
March  last. 

In  the  spring  of  1863,  I  joined  a  secret 
society,  called  the  Circle  of  Honor;  that 
was  directly  after  I  was  discharged  from  the 
army  for  disability.  I  was  a  private  in  the 
17th  Indiana  Volunteers,  and  was  with 
Sherman's  army.  I  joined  the  order  at  the 
solicitation  of  a  man  by  the  name  of  Ste 
phen  Horsey.  There  were  about  forty  or 
fifty  in  the  organization  at  the  time  I  joined. 
John  W.  Stone  was  the  head  man,  as  far  as 
speaking  was  concerned.  He  came  round 
to  make  speeches  to  the  order,  and  Stephen 
Horsey  assisted  him.  Horsey  resides  at  the 
Shoals  still,  but  Stone,  who  had  some  diffi 
culty  with  the  boys  of  the  17th  Indiana,  in 
which  he  had  his  fore-finger  shot  off,  went 
away,  with  his  wife,  to  Kentucky. 

Mr.  Horsey,  who  induced  me  to  join  the 
order,  said  if  I  would  join,  he  would  show 
me  the  elephant,  and  if  1  did  not  like  it 
after  I  was  in,  he  would  get  me  out.  He 
gave  the  name  of  the  order  as  the  Cir 
cle  of  Honor.  He  said  they  wanted  to  find 
out  how  strong  the  Democratic  party  was. 
As  I  had  been  a  Democrat  all  my  life,  I 
joined  the  order. 

About  two  months  after  joining,  they 
gave  us  the  Morgan  signs,  which  they  said 
would,  in  the  event  of  our  being  taken  pris 
oners,  and  making  ourselves  known,  secure 
us  better  treatment. 

[The  witness,  at  the  request  of  the  Judge 
Advocate,  gave  the  signs,  positions,  etc., 
which  were'similar  to  those  described  by  the 
witness  Stidger,  as  belonging  to  the  Vesti 
bule  degree  of  the  Order  of  American 
Knights.] 

We  had  a  little  book,  or  ritual,  which  a 
little  fellow,  whose  name  I  do  not  remem 
ber,  and  who  said  he  went  backward  and 
forward  to  Richmond,  brought  there.  It 
was  said  that  the  book  had  been  got  up  by 
Jeff  Davis  for  the  use  of  the  lodges. 

About  January,  1864,  Horsey  came  to  me 
and  said  they  were  going  to  have  a  very  im 
portant  meeting.  A  man  by  the  name  of 
T.  Baker  also  asked  me  to  go.  I  attended 
the  meeting.  They  taught  us  more  of  the 
signs  of  recognition  used  by  the  members, 
and  swore  us  into  Jeff'  Davis'  service ;  and 
we  were  to  support  him,  North  or  South,  at 
all  hazards.  That  was  no  part  of  the  oath 
we  took,  but  if  we  revealed  the  secrets  of 
the  order,  we  were  to  suffer  our  hearts  to  be 


48 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


torn  out,  and  our  bodies  to  be  cut  into 
pieces,  and  the  four  quarters  to  be  scattered 
north,  south,  east  and  west. 

It  was  said  by  members  that  Dr.  Bowles 
and  II.  H.  Dodd  were  connected  with  this 
organization.  Bowles  was  said  to  be  in 
New  York,  and  would  meet  Stone  here  at 
Indianapolis  about  the  26th  of  March.  It 
was  said  in  the  order  that  H.  H.  Dodd  was 
to  be  Governor  of  the  State,  in  Morton's 
place ;  that  Governor  Morton  was  to  be  put 
out  of  the  way,  and  Dodd  was  to  be  set  up 
in  his  place.  Stone  said  we  were  to  have 
arms,  and  were  to  resist  the  draft.  Lincoln, 
he  said,  had  been  scared  once  into  putting 
oft'  the  draft,  but  now  they  would  show  him 
something  that  would  scare  him  more  than 
that,  Lincoln  was  afraid,  he  said,  of  the 
arming  going  on  here  in  the  North.  This 
was  said  at  a  meeting  of  the  Temple  of 
Honor,  held  about  a  mile  east  of  the  Shoals, 
at  a  house  belonging  to  a  man  by  the  name 
of  Gaddis,  on  a  Saturday  night,  toward  the 
latter  part  of  the  month  of  January.  They 
said  we  must  have  our  old  rifles  and  shot 
guns  fixed  up  as  be^t  we  could,  and  that 
they  would  have  revolvers  shipped  to  them. 
Two  boxes  of  revolvers  came  there,  and  a 
man  by  the  name  of  Coffin,  a  blacksmith, 
helped  to  carry  them.  The  boxes  were 
passed  off  as  jewelry.  I  was  told  this  by 
Horsey. 

The  arms  were  to  be  used  to  assist  the 
rebels,  and  against  the  blue  coats,  as  they 
called  the  United  States  soldiers,  and  they 
said:  u  We  will  show  them  how  to  fight." 
They  expressed  their  intention  to  resist  the 
United  States  Government,  and  to  support 
the  South.  Stone  said,  in  his  speech,  that 
about  five  days  from  the  first  of  April,  they 
were  to  take  this  place  (Indianapolis);  the 
members  of  the  order  in  Illinois  were  to  take 
Springfield;  while  those  of  Missouri  were 
to  take  St.  Louis.  Bragg  was  to  do  all  he 
could  in  Tennessee ;  Morgan  was  to  advance 
his  force  into  Kentucky;  Forrest  was  to 
cross  the  Ohio  to  Illinois,  and  we  were  to 
aid.  The  Indianians  were  to  seize  this 
place  and  the  arsenal,  and  distribute  the 
arms  to  those  members  of  the  order  who 
had  none.  The  arsenal,  it  was  said,  would 
be  seized  when  there  were  but  few  soldiers 
here. 

At  that  meeting,  Stone  said  Governor 
Morton  was  to  be  put  out  of  the  way ;  that 
he  had  but  a  short  time  to  live  after  the 
visit  here  to  the  arsenal.  Stone  read  a  let 
ter  at  the  meeting,  signed  M.  D.,  in  which 
this  was  said  about  Governor  Morton. 

At  the  same  meeting,  something  was  said 
about  organizing  and  drilling.  I  never 
drilled  with  them,  but  an  old  man,  by  the 
namo  of  Woody,  asked  me  to  drill  them,  as 
I  had  been  in  the  army,  and  was  supposed 
to  know  something  about  it ;  but  I  would 
not. 

Among  the  signs  of  recognition  they  had 


in  January,  1864,  besides  that  I  have  men 
tioned,  was  the  sign  0.  A.  K,  spelling  the 
word  oak.  The  letters  composing  the  word 
were  to  be  pronounced  alternately  by  the 
parties  meeting.  There  was  also  the  sign 
of  distress.  In  case  of  the  arrest  of  a  mem 
ber  of  the  Order,  he  was  to  halloo  oak-oun 
three  times,  when  any  member  of  the  or 
der  who  heard  would  come  to  his  assistance 
at  all  hazards. 

I  first  revealed  the  designs  of  the  order 
to  Captain  Henley,  in  March  of  this  year, 
when  I  wrote  out  a  statement  of  the  mat 
ter,  giving  the  signs,  signals,  etc.,  substan 
tially  as  I  have  given  them  here.  I  have 
not  seen,  read,  or  heard  any  thing  in  con 
nection  with  this  matter  testified  to  by  the 
witness  Felix  G.  Sticlger.  I  have  not  at 
tended  a  meeting  of  the  order  since  Janu 
ary,  186,4,  nor  have  I  conversed  with  a  mem 
ber  of  the  order  since  that  time.  The  rea 
son  why  I  did  not  continue  to  attend  was, 
that  the  avowed  principles  of  the  order  did 
not  suit  me.  I  had  a  brother  in  the  United 
States  army,  and  I  told  my  father  that  I 
should  report  on  them,  and  they  might  do 
just  what  they  liked  with  me. 

Stone  said  that  communication  was  kept 
up  between  the  order  and  the  rebels,  and 
that  the  only  way  to  save  the  Government 
was  to  elect  Jeff  Davis  the  next  President. 
That  Jeff  Davis  had  three  times  offered  to 
compromise,  and  that  Lincoln's  Govern 
ment  would  not  do  it,  and  that  now  some 
thing  would  have  to  be  done  to  make  them 
yield. 

I  did  not  join  the  order  as  a  detective, 
nor  have  I  ever  acted  as  such.  '  I  joined  it 
in  good  faith,  supposing  it  to  be  a  legitimate 
organization.  I  have  received  no  fee  or 
offer  of  reward  for  my  testimony,  and  no 
promise  of  any  kind  has  been  made  to  me 
to  induce  me  to  testify. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Thursday,  October  6,  at  10  o'clock,  A.  M. 


COUBT  BOOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         ) 
October  6, 1864, 10  o'clock,  A.  M.  / 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

All  the  members  present;  also  the  Judge 
Advocate,  the  accused,  and  his  counsel. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

WESLEY  TRANTER,  a  witness  for  the  Gov 
ernment,  resumed  his  testimony  as  follows : 

John  Stone  said,  at  the  meeting  in  Jan 
uary  I  have  referred  to,  that,  of  the  Western 
States,  Indiana,  Illinois  and  Missouri  would 
join  the  Southern  Confederacy,  and  that 
they  would  lick  out  "Old  Abe"  and  his  blue 
coats. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  first  made  up  my  mind  to  expose  the 
order  the  next  day  after  I  was  sworn  into 
the  Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle.  When 
I  told  my  father  what  my  intentions  were, 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


he  was  a  little  scared,  and  told  me  to  tell 
my  uncle  at  Washington,  Davis  county, 
which  I  did,  and  he  advised  me  to  come 
here  and  report.  I  came  here  to  Indianap 
olis  about  the  10th  of  March,  and  Captain 
Henley  wrote  out  my  statement. 

The  cause  of  John  W.  Stone's  leaving 
was :  a  Lieutenant  of  the  17th  Indiana, 
with  some  of  the  boys,  were  going  to  arrest 
him,  to  find  out  if  he  knew  who  killed  some 
of  our  soldiers.  When  Stone  saw  them 
coming,  he  tried  to  make  his  escape,  when 
they  fired,  and  his  fore-finger  was  said  to 
have  been  shot  off. 

The  name  of  the  order  I  joined,  was  the 
Circle  of  Honor;  I  met  with  them  some 
four  or  five  times,  when  it  was  reorganized 
as  the  Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle.  The 
obligation  taken  in  the  Knights  of  the  Gold 
en  Circle  was  to  support  Jeff  Davis,  either 
North  or  South. 

The  soldiers  who  went  to  take  Stone,  also 
went  after  Horsey,  but  I  think  I  saved  him, 
and  Dr.  Bowles  too.  Dr.  Bowles  was  to  be 
our  general  to  lead  us  South  to  support 
Jeff  Davis.  Bowles  sent  for  some  of  us 
boys  to  go  down  to  French  Lick  Springs, 
where  he  lived.  I  was  not  alarmed  at  re 
ceiving  the  Morgan  signs,  and  the  prospect 
of  serving  under  Bowles.  I  knew  we  had 
the  right  sort  of  man  to  lead  us,  and  that 
he  would  run  if  there  was  danger,  as  he  did 
in  Mexico,  and  that  we  would  be  safe. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

We  had  a  hailing  sign  in  the  order,  or 
sign  of  distress  ;  it  was  the  word  '*  oak-oun  " 
pronounced  ihree  times. 

The  statement  which  Captain  Henley 
wrote  out  from  my  dictation  at  the  Bates 
House  in  this  city,  was  sent  to  General  Car- 
rington. 

TESTIMONY   OF    ELLIOT    ROBERTSON. 

Elliot  Robertson,  a  witness  for  the  Gov 
ernment,1  being  duly  sworn,  in  answer  to  in 
terrogatories  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testi 
fied  as  follows : 

I  .am  a  farmer,  and  live  in  Randolph 
county,  Indiana.  I  joined  the  Order  of  the 
Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle  in  Green  Fork 
township,  Indiana,  about  the  1st  of  June, 
1863,  or  a  little  later.  I  joined  at  the  soli 
citation  of  a  man  by  the  name  of  John  D. 
Burkebyle,  who  was  the  chief  of  the  order  at 
that  place.  A  person  named  Nathan  Brown, 
who  was  understood  in,  the  order  to  have 
been  sent  from  the  leaders  here  in  Indian 
apolis,  organized  the  order  in  our  town 
ship.  I  do  not  recollect  the  obligation  I 
took,  except  the  penalty  for  disclosing  the 
secrets  of  the  order,  which  was  death ;  the 
body  being  cut  into  four  quarters,  one  part 
to  be  cast  out  at  each  gate,  north,  south, 
east  and  west.  They  had  grips  and  signs, 
etc.,  by  which  members  of  the  order  could 
recognize  and  test  each  other.  First  we 
4 


stood  in  a  military  position,  with  the  heel 
of  the  right  foot  in  the  hollow  of  the  left, 
arms  folded,  with  the  two  first  fingers  of 
the  left  hand  apart.  This  position  was  an 
swered,  when  it  was  recognized,  by  passing 
the  right  hand  across  the  face,  as  though 
stroking  the  mustache.  Another  sign  was 
a  grip,  in  which  each  party  held  the  fore 
finger  so  that  it  should  reach  as  far  as  it 
could  up  the  wrist. 

The  order  was  understood  to  be  organized 
for  military  purposes,  and  about  one-half  of 
the  members  were  armed.  The  intention 
of  the  order  was  to  oppose  the  Administra 
tion  in  its  attempts  to  put  down  the  rebel 
lion. 

The  name  of  the  order  was  changed  to 
American  Knights  about  September,  1863. 
I  was  invited  to  join  the  new  order,  but  did 
not.  I  was  instructed  in  it  by  the  captain 
of  the  Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle. 
Nearly  all  who  belonged  to  the  Knights  of 
the  Golden  Circle  became  members  of  the 
new  order. 

I  passed  into  a  lodce  of  the  American 
Knights  in  Gratis  township,  Preble  county, 
Ohio,  about  two  months  ago.  A  friend  of 
mine  took  me,  but  nothing  particular  was 
done.  I  have  not  attended  any  regular 
meeting  of  the  order  since  September,  1863. 

One  purpose  of  the  organization  was  to 
oppose  the  draft  and  arbitrary  arrests,  and 
by  force  of  arms,  if  need  be;  but  the  un 
derstanding  was,  that  our  operations  were 
to  be  confined  to  Indiana. 

Burkebyle  and  Brown  said  that  it  was 
only  in  part  determined  what  should  be 
done  in  case  of  the  draft.  It  was  said  at  a 
meeting  of  the  order,  that  should  a  draft 
be  made,  they  would  know  in  time  whether 
we  were  to  resist  or  not. 

The  captain  said  he  had  orders  from  In 
dianapolis  to  arm  the  members  of  the  or 
der.  The  question  was  discussed  as  to  how 
we  should  get  arms.  Some  were  in  favor 
of  buying  their  own  arms,  but  the  captain 
said  there  were  plenty  of  arms  here  in  In 
dianapolis,  and  we  were  not  to  be  uneasy 
about  that.  I  do  not  know  of  any  arms 
being  distributed,  except  from  hearsay. 

I  joined  the  order  more  out  of  curiosity 
than  any  thing  else.  I  iiever  acted  in  any 
capacity  as  a  United  States  Detective.  My 
testimony  before  this  Commission  is  volun 
tary,  and  no  offer  or  promise  of  reward, 
in  any  way,  has  been  made  to  me  to  inducx* 
me  to  testify  in  this  case. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  volunteered  as  a  soldier  in  the  16th 
Indiana,  on  the  22d  of  August  last,  and 
made  a  statement  to  General  Carring- 
ton  respecting  the  order  soon  after  I  vol 
unteered.  Have  not  joined  my  regiment 
yet,  or  been  on  particular  duty.  I  should 
have  made  a  statement  of  the  objects  of 
the  organization  to  the  authorities  before, 


50 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


if  I  could  have  received  protection  for  so 
doing.  I  made  a  statement  to  'Squire 
Hough,  I  think  in  October,  which  was 
Bworn  to  by  me.  I  met  with  the  order 
after  making  this  statement  to  'Squire 
Hough,  but  only  to  learn  their  intentions 
more  fully.  I  was  formerly  a  Republican, 
but  had  become  a  Democrat  before  joining 
the  order.  When  I  made  the  statement 
to  'Squire  Hough,  I  was  a  Union  man,  and 
did  not  want  to  favor  the  order. 

1  only  know  of  one  attempt  to  resist 
what  was  called  arbitrary  arrests.  Burke- 
byle  thought  he  was  going  to  be  arrested, 
and  I  and  some  of  the  members  of  the  or 
der  met  at  his  house  to  resist  it.  Burke- 
byle  said  to  me,  that  it  had  become  known 
that  he  was  a  member  of  the  Order  of  the 
Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle.  We  met  at 
his  house  two  nights.  I  was  armed  with  a 
gun.  Burkebyle's  two  boys,  Henry  Woodin, 
Henry  Robinson,  and  another  man,  were 
there. 

J.  D.  Burkebyle  was  our  captain,  Abram 
Platt  was  treasurer,  and  Francis  Burridge 
was  secretary;  Amos  Crew  was  lieutenant, 
and  Henry  Woodin  sergeant.  There  were 
between  sixty  and  seventy-five  members  in 
the  order  at  Green  Fork  township. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Friday,  October  7,  at  half-past  8,  A.  M. 

COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,        ) 
October  7,  1864,  8%  A.  M.j 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  ad 
journment. 

All  the  members  present,  except  Colonel 
Benjamin  Spooner.  Also  present  the  Judge 
Advocate,  and  the  counsel  for  the  accused. 

It  was  then  announced  by  the  Judge  Ad 
vocate  that  the  accused,  Harrison  H.^Dodd, 
had  escaped,  and  could  not  be  present;  he 
therefore  asked  for  an  adjournment  of 
the  Commission  till  11  o'clock  A.  M.,  at 
which  time  he  proposed  to  submit  the  case 
to  the  Commission,  that  they  might  proceed 
to  the  finding  and  sentence. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused,  Jonathan 
W.  Gordon,  Esq.,  and  Martin  M.  Ray,  Esq., 
then  submitted  to  the  Commission  *an  affi 
davit  touching  the  escape  of  the  accused: 

United  States  of  America    ") 

vs.  }-  Before  Military  Com. 

Harrison  H.  Dodd.        J 

Be  it  remembered,  that  on  this  7th  day  of 
October,  1864,  personally  came  before  me 


The  following  extract  from  the  report  of  Colonel  A.  J. 
Warner,  Commander  of  the  Post,  Indianapolis,  to  Cap- 
tnin  A.  C.  Kemper,  A.  A.  G.,  gives  all  tho  particulars 
known  of  the  escape  of  H.  H.  Dodd,  on  the  morning  of 
tho  7th  of  October: 

Mr.  Harrison  H.  Dodd,  who  was  on  trial  in  this  city 
before  the  Military  Commission,  on  a  charge  of  trea 
son  and  conspiracy,  made  his  escape  from  the  room  oc 
cupied  by  him,  in  the  third  story  of  the  Post  Office 
Building,  a  few  minutes  before  4  o'clock  this  morning. 
He  escaped  through  the  window,  opening  on  Pennsylva 
nia  street,  by  means  of  a  rope  attached  to  an  iron  rod. 
which  was  held  fast  between  his  bed  and  the  iron  win 
dow  shutter.  A  ball  of  twine  had  been  couveyed  to  him 


H.  L.  Burnett,  Judge  Advocate  Department 
of  the  Ohio  and  Northern  Department, 
Jonathan  W.  Gordon  and  Martin  M.  Ray, 
the  counsel  for  Harrison  IT.  Dodd,  in  trial 
before  a  Military  Commission,  in  the  city 
of  Indianapolis,  and  being  by  'me  duly 
sworn  according  to  law,  depose  and  say 
jointly  and  severally,  each  for  himself,  that 
they  have  this  morning  heard  with  sur 
prise  of  the  escape  of  their  client,  H.  H. 
Dodd,  from  his  prison,  in  this  city. 

They  further  declare,  as  an  act  due  from 
them  to  this  Commission,  that  never 
by  word,  act  or  intimation,  did  they,  or 
either  of  them,  counsel,  prompt,  suggest  or 
intimate  to  said  Dodd,  or  to  any  friend  or 
acquaintance  of  said  Dodd,  or  any  one  else, 
his  escape  from  prison;  nor  was  any  thing 
upon  the  subject  ever  intimated  among 
themselves;  nor  had  they,  at  any  time,  from 
any  source,  any  notice  or  suspicion  that  said 
Dodd  contemplated  any  such  escape ;  and 
they  thus  declare  their  entire  innocence, 
in  thought,  word  or  deed  of  his  escape. 
And  they  ask  this  statement  to  go  upon  the 
record  in  this  cause.  M.  M.  RAY, 

J.  W.  GORDON. 

Sworn  to  before  me,  and  subscribed  in  my 
presence,  this  7th  day  of  October,  1864. 

H.  L.  BURNETT, 
Judge   Advocate   Department  of   the    Ohio   and 

Northern  Department. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
at  11  o'clock,  A.  M. 

AFTERNOON    SESSION. 

Counx  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,        \ 
October  7,  18G4,  11  o'clock,  A.  M.  J 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

The  same  members  present  as  at  the 
morning  session.  Also,  the  Judge  Advo 
cate,  and  the  counsel  for  the  accused. 

The  Judge  Advocate  then  addressed  the 
Commission  as  follows : 

The  accused,  Harrison  PI.  Dodd,  having 
made  his  escape,  as  I  announced  at  the  first 
session  to-day,  I  had  thought  of  asking  the 
Commission  to  proceed  on  the  evidence  al 
ready  before  them  to  their  finding  and  sen 
tence  ;  and  though  it  may  be  the  course  I 


by  some  of  his  friends  who  had  been  permitted  to  visit 
him,  by  means  of  which  he  had  drawn  up  to  his  window 
a  large  rope,  furnished  by  some  persous  outside-,  who 
assisted  in  his  escape. 

There  was  no  guard  on  the  outside  of  the  building, 
and  the  attempt  was  not  detected,  until  tho  prisoner  had 
reached  the  ground  and  escaped.  The  street  lamps  near 
by  had  boon  previously  darkened  to  conceal  tho  move 
ment. 

When  Mr.  Dodd*  petitioned  Brevet  Major  General 
Hovey,  Commander  of  the  District,  to  be  allowed  to  oc« 
cupy  a  room  in  the  Post  Office  Building,  instead  of  being 
closely  confined  in  the  Military  Prison,  he  gave  hia 
parole  of  honor,  that  he  would  make  no  attempt  to  es 
cape.  His  brother  also  pledged  his  word,  and  stated  he 
would  risk  all  he  was  worth  that  H.  H.  Dodd  would  not 
ry  to  escape,  if  this  privilege  was  granted. 

Measures,  therefore,  that  would  have  been  taken  to 
prevent  escape,  by  placing  guards  on  the  outside  as 
well  as  within  the  building,  were  not,  under  the  cir 
cumstances,  resorted  to  in  this  case. 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


51 


shall  finally  ask  the  Commission  to  pursue, 
[  think  it  best  at  present  to  recommend 
that  the  Commission  adjourn  till  such  time 
as  they  think  best.  In  the  mean  time,  I 
will  prepare-  the  papers  against  some  other 
prisoners,  with  whose  trial  we  may  proceed, 
allowing  the  present  case  to  remain  for  the 
time  in  its  present  condition. 

The  law,  so  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  ex 
amine  the  decisions  in  the  United  States 
Reports,  and  the  reports  of  the  States  of 
New  York,  Indiana,  Alabama,  Arkansas, 
and  one  of  the  Ohio  Reports,  all  go  to  this 
extent :  That  where  a  prisoner,  by  his  own 
default,  is  not  present  to  receive  the  verdict 
of  the  jury  and  the  sentence  of  the  Court, 
waives,  by  his  own  act.  the  constitutional 
right  which  he  had,  that  he  could  not  again 
be  put  in  jeopardy  of  life  or  limb ;  but  hav 
ing,  by  his  own  act,  deprived  himself  of  that 
privilege,  he  may  again  be  put  upon  trial  for 
the  same  offense.  Or,  as  the  law  expresses 
it,  there  was  from  the  beginning  no  jeop 
ardy,  or  it  can  not  be  said  there  was  a  real 
jeopardy,  because  he  may,  from  the  begin 
ning,  have  had  an  intent  to  escape  before 
the  sentence  of  the  law  could  act  upon  him. 
The  civil  decisions  say,  further,  that  while 
he  has  deprived  himself  of  that  privilege, 
yet,  as  a  general  rule,  the  Court  can  not  pro 
ceed  to  sentence,  or  the  jury  to  give  a  ver 
dict,  because  he  may  have  the  privilege  of 
u  polling  the  jury."  It  is  one  of  the  rights 
of  the  accused  to  make  a  claim  or  plea  to 
the  Court,  and  his  presence  is  necessary  to 
the  rendition  of  the  verdict  and  the  passing 
of  sentence.  Later  decisions,  however,  by 
the  Supreme  Court  of  this  State,  and  also 
the  Supreme  Court  of  Ohio,  go  to  the  ex 
tent  that  if  a  person,  of  his  own  default,  is 
not  present  to  receive  the  verdict  of  the 
jury  and  the  sentence  of  the  Court,  yet  the 
Court  may  receive  the  verdict  of  the  jury 
and  give  sentence.  I  apprehend,  therefore, 
that  this  reasoning  would  hold  writh  greater 
force  before  a  court-martial  or  military  com 
mission,  for  the  reason, "that  in  a  court-mar 
tial  or  military  commission,  the  accused  is 
never  present  when  the  Court  proceed  to 
their  finding  and  sentence.  The  moment  I 
say  to  the  Commission,  "  The  evidence  on 
behalf  of  the  Government  is  closed,"  the 
accused  may  introduce  evidence  to  rebut 
that  which  has  been  introduced  on  the  part 
of  the  prosecution,  or  he  may  waive  that 
privilege,  and  present  his  defense  in  the 
shape  of  an  address,  called  "  the  Address 
of  the  Accused,"  and  given  under  oath,  or 
otherwise,  and  which  may  be  received  by 
the  Court  in  extenuation  or  mitigation  of 
his  sentence.  But  if,  for  any  reason,  the"  ac 
cused  abandons  his  cause,  and  fails  to  rebut 
the  evidence  produced  on  the  part  of  the 
Government,  he  waives  his  right  of  address; 
in  other  words,  he  says,  "  I  have  no  defense." 
The  Court  then  proceeds  to  close  the  doors 
to  deliberate  on  the  finding  and  sentence. 


I  do  not  see  why  such  a  course  could  not  be 
pursued  in  strict  accordance  with  reason 
and  justice,  and  the  due  observance  of  mili 
tary  law. 

I  make  these  suggestions  at  this  time,  that 
the  gentlemen  engaged  as  counsel  for  the 
accused  may  be  made  aware  of  what  may 
be  claimed  in  the  premises  on  the  part  of 
the  Government. 

I  now  ask  the  Commission  to  adjourn  to 
such  time  as  they  may  deem  best. 

The  Commission,  after  deliberation,  ad 
journed  to  meet  on  Thursday,  October  13, 
1864,  at  2  o'clock,  P.  M. 


M,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         > 
tober  13,  18G4,  2  o'clock,  P.  M.  J 


COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA, 
Octt 


The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

In  consequence  of  the  absence  of  a  mem 
ber,  the  Commission  adjourned  to  meet  on 
Saturday,  October  15,  1864,  at  9  o'clock, 
A.  M, 


COTJUT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         ) 
October  15,  1864,  9  o'clock,  A.  M.  j" 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

All  the  members  present ;  also  the  Judge 
Advocate,  and  the  counsel  for  the  accused. 

Absent,  the  accused,  Harrison  H.  Dodd. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

The  Judge  Advocate  then  addressed  the 
Commission  as  follows : 

As  I  intimated  at  the  last  session  of  the 
Commission  preceding  our  late  informal 
meeting,  I  propose  now  to  submit  the  case 
of  the  accused,  Harrison  H.  Dodd,  on  the 
evidence  already  introduced,  and  to  ask  the 
Commission  to  proceed  to  their  finding  in 
the  case,  and,  in  the  event  of  finding  against 
the  accused,  to  sentence. 

For  authorities  in  support  of  such  a  course, 
I  propose  simply  to  cite  certain  late  decis 
ions  in  similar  cases,  by  the  Supreme  Court 
of  Ohio,  and  also  by  the  Supreme  Court  of 
this  State. 

The  first  case  is  from  the  Ohio  Reports, 
vol.  VII,  page  180.  Charles  Fight  vs.  The 
State.  The  plaintiff  was  arraigned  at  the 
August  term  of  the  Brown  Common  Pleas 
Court,  plead  not  guilty,  and,  on  his  motion 
and  giving  security,  the  prosecution  was 
continued  to  the  November  term.  He  was 
placed  on  trial  before  the  jury  on  the  fourth 
day  of  the  succeeding  term,  and  the  testi 
mony  being  partly  heard,  the  Court  ad 
journed  until  the  next  morning,  at  which 
time  the  Court  met,  and  the  plaintiff  being 
called,  made  default.  The  Court  then  is 
sued  a  bench-warrant  for  the  plaintiff,  and 
proceeded  to  charge  the  jury.  On  the  next 
day  the  jury  rendered  a  verdict  of  guilty, 
which  was  received  by  the  Court  in  the  ab 
sence 'of  the  plaintiff.  At  the  succeeding 
March  term,  the  plaintiff  asked  for  a  new 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


trial,  assigning,  among  other  reasons,  that 
the  jury  had  heard  only  a  part  of  the  testi 
mony,  and  that  the  verdict  was  brought  in 
during  his  absence.  This  was  overruled, 
when  the  plaintiff  moved  an  arrest  of  judg 
ment  for  substantially  the  same  reasons. 
The  case  was  argued  before  the  Supreme 
Court,  and  the  opinion  delivered  by  Judge 
Wood  was  concurred  in  by  all  the  Court. 

The  synopsis  gives  the  point  of  the  case 
in  these  words: 

"Where,  pending  a  trial  upon  a  criminal 
prosecution,  the  accused,  being  on  bail,  ab 
sconds,  it  is  legal  to  proceed  with  the  case, 
and  to  receive  a  verdict  of  guilty  in  his  ab 
sence." 

The  opinion  of  the  Court  is  as  follows : 

"  In  England,  in  misdemeanors,  where  the 
defendant  is  on  bail,  a  trial,  a  conviction  and 
sentence  may  be  had  in  his  absence.  He  is 
present  or  not,  at  his  option.  In  felonies,  a 
different  rule,  it  is  true,  prevails.  The  ac 
cused  must  be  present  when  every  principle 
of  the  law  is  discussed  and  determined  in 
which  he  is  concerned.  The  reason  of  this 
difference  in  the  mode  of  proceeding  in  the 
two  cases  can  not,  perhaps,  at  this  time,  be 
satisfactorily  ascertained :  or,  rather,  no  sat 
isfactory  reason  can  be  given  for  it.  A 
prisoner  in  close  custody  may  be  so  easily 
oppressed  and  deprived  of  his  rights,  and  it 
would  be  so  extremely  difficult  for  him  to 
make  known  his  injuries  and  obtain  redress, 
that  to  prevent  unnecessary  restraint,  and 
to  afford  the  accused  an  opportunity  of  be 
ing  fully  and  fairly  heard,  the  rule  in  refer 
ence  to  him  may  be  reasonable  and  salutary; 
but  it  would  apply  with  force  to  all  classes 
of  offenders.  But  in  felony,  the  accused  is 
not  necessarily  confined  within  the  four 
walls  of  the  prison.  Both  before  and  after 
the  conquest,  all  felonies  were  bailable  by 
the  common  ancient.law.  The  Stat.  Weston,  1 
and  3  Ed.,  1  c.,  15 ;  23  Hen.,  9,  c.  9 ;  and  1  and 
2  PA.  and  Mar.,  c.  13,  except  treason  and  mur 
der,  and  certain  other  crimes  from  those  for 
which  the  King's  justices  may  bail.  (BL 
Gom.,  4  vol.,  208.)  But  the  Court  of  King's 
Bench,  or  any  judge  thereof,  in  vacation, 
may,  at  their  discretion,  admit  persons  to 
bail,  in  all  cases  whatsoever.  (3  East,  163,  5  J. 
R.,  169),  but  none  can  claim  this  benefit  de 
jure  (2  Hale,  129).  If  on  bail,  1  apprehend, 
neither  the  courts  of  Great  Britain  nor  the 
United  States  would  proceed  to  impannel  a 
jury,  in  a  trial  for  felony,  unless  the  ac 
cused  were  present  to  look  to  his  challen 
ges.  If  the  trial,  however,  is  once  com 
menced,  and  the  prisoner,  in  his  own  wrong, 
leaves  the  Court,  abandons  his  case  to  the  manage 
ment  of  counsel,  and  runs  away,  I  can  find  no 
adjudged  case  to  sustain  the  position,  that 
in  England  the  proceedings  would  be  stayed. 
Such  a  case  must  form  an  exception  to  the 
general  rule,  and  the  verdict  may  be  legally 
received  in  the  absence  of  the  accused.  The 
prisoner  can  not  be  deprived  of  his  right  to 


be  present,  at  all  stages  of  his  trial;  but 
that  he  must  be,  under  all  circumstances,  or 
the  proceedings  will  be  erroneous,  can  not, 
we  think,  be  sustained." 

The  next  case  I  shall  cite  is  from  vol.  14, 
Indiana  Reports,  page  39.  It  is  an  opinion 
delivered  by  Judge  Perkins,  of  this  State, in 
the  case  of  McCorkle  vs.  The  State.  I  shall 
read  only  that  portion  of  the  opinion  appli 
cable  to  this  point: 

"  The  constitution  and  laws  provide  that 
a  defendant  in  a  criminal  case  shall  be  pres 
ent  at  his  trial.  This  is  for  a  twofold  object: 

"  1.  That  the  defendant  may  have  the  op 
portunity  of  meeting  the  witnesses  and 
jury  face  to  face,  and  of  directing  the  causes 
of  his  trial. 

"  2.  That  the  State  may  be  in  possession 
of  his  person,  so  that  judgment  may  be  ex 
ecuted  thereon.  I 

"Now,  the  question  is,  are  not  these  pro 
visions,  so  far  as  they  are  in  favor  of  the  de 
fendant,  designed  to  confer  a  privilege  which 
he  may  waive?  He  can  waive  a  trial  alto 
gether,  and  plead  guilty.  He  can  waive  the 
constitutional  and  legal  privilege  of  trial  by 
jury.  He  can  waive  the  constitutional  and 
legal  privilege  of  being  a  second  time  put 
in  jeopardy.  And  shall  it  be  said  that  he 
can  not  waive  his  privilege  of  being  present 
when  his  witnesses  are  examined,  or  any 
one  of  them  ?  Then  did  he,  as  a  question 
of  fact,  make  such  waiver  in  this  case  ?  If 
he  had  voluntarily  arisen  in  Court,  and 
asked  to  be  absent  in  the  custody  of  an  of 
ficer,  or  otherwise,  for  a  period  of  time,  re 
questing  that  the  trial  should  proceed  in 
his  absence,  the  waiver  would  be  clear.  But 
how  does  such  a  step  differ,  in  substance, 
from  a  voluntary  departure  without  asking 
that  the  trial  shall  stop  ?  In  one  case  the 
consent  is  vocally,  in  the  other,  tacitly,  but 
equally  clearly,  expressed." 

This  was  a  case  in  which  the  prisoner  ab 
sented  himself  during  a  portion  of  his  trial. 
The  next  case  in  point  is  reported  in  the 
Sixteenth  Indiana  Reports,  page  357.  The 
State  vs.  Wamire.  The  opinion  was  deliv 
ered  by  Judge  Perkins,  and  is  the  last  case 
in  point,  on  record,  that  I  know  of. 

"  3.  The  court  is  not  bound  to  discharge 
the  jury  because  of  the  voluntary  absence 
of  the  defendant  during  the  trial,  he  hav 
ing  been  present  at  the  commencement, 
\McCarJtk  vs.  The  State,  Fourteenth  Indiana, 
39;  Fight  vs.  The  State,  Seventh  Ohio  (Ham.) 
Reports,  Part  1,  page  181],  but  may  proceed 
on  to  verdict,  at  all  events,  in  his  absence." 

In  all  the  cases  I  have  cited,  the  authori 
ties  go  further  than  I  ask  the  Commission 
to  proceed.  I  do  not  propose  to  introduce 
testimony  in  the  absence  of  the  accused, 
but  simply  to  submit  the  case  to  the  Com 
mission  upon  the  evidence  already  intro 
duced,  and  upon  this  evidence  I  ask  the 
Commission  to  proceed  to  its  finding  and 
sentence.  The  reason  for  such  a  course  is 


TREASON  TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


53 


stronger  in  a  court  of  this  kind,  than  it 
would  be  before  a  civil  tribunal.  The  mo 
ment  I  am  able  to  gay  to  the  Commission, 
"  The  evidence  in  the  case  is  closed,''  the 
accused  would  have  to  withdraw  by  the 
rules  of  the  court,  and  the  court-room 
would  be  cleared,  and  the  Commission 
would  at  once  proceed  to  deliberate  upon 
the  evidence  and  to  arrive  at  their  finding 
and  sentence.  When  that  finding  and  sen 
tence  is  arrived  at,  it  is  not  made  known  to 
the  accused  by  this  Commission ;  it  is  not 
known  as  possessing  vitality  or  even  exist 
ence,  until  it  has  been  submitted  to  the 
convening  authority,  and  by  him  reviewed 
and  approved.  If  approved,  it  is  made 
known  to  the  accused  by  the  Commanding 
General,  or,  in  technical  phrase,  it  is  "pro 
mulgated  "  in  General  Orders. 

In  this  case  the  accused  has  waived — as 
is  frequently  done  by  prisoners — his  right 
and  privilege  of  introducing  rebutting  tes 
timony,  and  also  his  right  and  privilege  of 
submitting  his  final  appeal  or  address  to  the 
Commission. 

I  therefore  submit  the  case  to  the  Com 
mission,  and  ask  them  to  proceed  to  their 
finding  and  sentence. 

KEPLY  OF  J.  W.  GORDON,  ESQ.,  COUXSEL  FOR 
THE  ACCUSED. 

May  it  please  t/ie  Court : 

I  wish  to  say  one  word  in  relation  to  the 
position  taken  by  the  Judge  Advocate  upon 
the  authorities  he  has  just  read.  These  au 
thorities — more  properly  decisions — at  least 
in  the  State  of  Indiana,  have  been  gravely 
and  severely  questioned  by  learned  mem 
bers  of  the  profession,  and  by  the  profession 
generally ;  and  I  doubt  whether  in  the 
future  they  will  not  be  overruled.  They 
yet  stand,  however,  as  the  opinion  of  our 
Supreme  Court.  If  it  be  granted,  therefore, 
that  they  are  law — that  they  govern  to  a 
certain  extent  the  proceedings  of  our  State 
courts,  in  the  trial  of  felons,  is  it  quite  cer 
tain  that  they  are  applicable  to  the  case 
now  before  this  Commission  ?  Is  it  certain 
that  they  can  be  properly  employed  AS  au 
thorities  even  analogically,  in  a  military 
court,  upon  the  trial  of  a  military  offense? 

Precedent  makes  law.  I  apprehend,  how 
ever,  that  no  military  man,  or,  indeed,  any 
one  else,  will  be  able  to  find,  after  the  most 
thorough  ^examination  of  the  military  au 
thorities,  a  single  precedent,  where  a  mili 
tary  prisoner,  having  been  once  before  a 
military  court,  entered  upon  his  trial,  pro 
ceeded  to  some  length  therein,  and  then 
escaped,  and  has  yet  been  proceeded  against 
in  that  trial  unto  sentence.  I  apprehend 
that  no  precedent  can  be  found  to  that 
effect.  I  am  quite  certain  that  the  books 
which  I  have  been  able  to  consult,  furnish 
no  such  precedent;  and  I  think  it  is  so  for 
the  best  of  all  possible  reasons — the  reason 
that  there  does  not  exist  such  a  precedent. 


In  all  military  proceedings  of  this  charac 
ter,  the  accused  is  arrested.  If  he  be  an 
officer,  the  order  of  arrest  confines  him  to 
his  quarters,  or  to  the  camp,  or  gives  him 
such  limits  as  the  commanding  officer  may 
think  proper  to  prescribe.  If  he  be  an  en 
listed  man,  he  is  generally  confined,  and 
especially  if  the  offense  be  heinous,  to  the 
guard-house,  a  close  prisoner.  There  is  no 
bail  in  military  cases;  no  such  thing  as 
allowing  the  accused  to  go  at  large ;  and, 
hence,  when  his  trial  begins  he  must  be 
present.  He  is  accordingly  brought  before 
the  court,  if  he  be  an  enlisted  man,  under 
guard;  if  an  officer,  by  citation;  but,  in 
either  case,  he  is  always  required  to  1^e 
present  when  the  trial  opens;  present  all 
the  way  along  through  the  trial ;  and,  as  I 
said  before,  I  have  yet  to  find  the  first  pre 
cedent  in  military  law,  where,  in  a  military 
court,  a  prisoner  has  been  proceeded  against 
in  his  absence. 

The  case  before  the  Commission  is  not 
unlike  that  of  an  enlisted  man.  The  ac 
cused  here,  not  being  an  officer,  had  the 
limits  of  no  camp  allowed  him.  He  was 
confined  to  his  prison,  to  his  room,  with  a 
guard  at  his  door,  and  subjected  to  pretty 
severe  surveillance.  I  know  it  has  been 
said  that  he  was  on  his  parole  of  honor; 
and  no  doubt  he  did  give  his  word  to  the 
General,  or  to  the  party  who  enlarged  him 
and  placed  him  in  more  comfortable  quar 
ters  in  this  building ;  but  it  was  not  a  case 
of  parole  of  honor,  as  that  existing  in  the 
army  with  prisoners  of  war.  It  was  not  a 
case  in  which  there  was  any  provision  made 
by  the  law  of  the  land,  or  military  law  for 
paroling.  On  the  contrary,  it  was  a  case  in 
which  the  order  of  the  President,  the  only 
law  on  the  subject,  provided  that  there 
should  be  no  writ  of  habeas  coiyus ;  and,  of 
course,  no  enlargement  of  the  prisoner.  He 
was,  then,  a  prisoner  under  guard.  He  has 
escaped.  These  authorities,  therefore,  can 
not,  as  I  conceive,  be  held  applicable  to 
this  case,  however  fit  to  be  followed  in  civil 
courts,  where  all  felons,  except  traitors  and 
murderers,  may  be  at  large  during  their 
trial,  as  in  the  case  of  McCorkle,  and,  I 
think,  of  the  others  whose  cases  have  been 
cited. 

If,  therefore,  the  accused  has  escaped, 
the  law  must,  in  my  opinion,  be  held  to  be 
different  in  his  case  in  this  court  from  that 
maintained  'in  the  civil  courts  of  the  State 
of  Indiana  upon  the  cases  cited;  and.  I 
think  so,  not  only  for  the  protection  of  the 
accused,  should  he  be  again  arrested,  but 
also  for  the  protection  of  the  rights  of  the 
Government.  True,  the  Government  may 
waive  its  rights  as  against  him ;  but,  as  I 
understand,  there  is  yet  more  evidence  to 
be  adduced  against  him.  Should  the  case, 
therefore,  be  now  submitted  to  the  Com 
mission,  upon  the  evidence  already  before 
them,  and  should  that  evidence  turn  out, 


54 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


in  their  opinion,  not  to  bo  sufficient  to  sus 
tain  the  charges  and  specifications  against 
him,  why,  then,  the  Government,  by  this 
course — which,  I  admit,  is  not  my  affair, 
and  I  only  make  the  suggestion  by  permis 
sion — will  lose  forever  the  opportunity  of 
bringing  him  to  condign  punishment,  even 
should  he  be  really  guilty  of  these  offenses. 
If  the  cause  is  submitted  now  upon  this 
evidence,  and  the  constitutional  provision 
f»hall  be  held  to  apply  to  this  case,  he  will 
not  be  allowed  to  be  put  in  jeopardy  again 
for  any  one  of  these  offenses.  This  is  a 
consideration,  however,  which  belongs  en 
tirely  to  the  Government  side  of  the  case. 
The  prosecutor  may  introduce  further  evi 
dence  if  he  think  proper;  or  may  stop  at  any 
stage  of  the  proceedings. 

But  the  accused  is  not  here;  and  the 
nature  of  the  punishment  that  may  be  in 
flicted,  should  he  be  found  guilty,  affords 
another  reason  why  he  should  be  present 
before  proceeding  to  sentence  him.  These 
are  all  of  a  corporeal,  physical  nature,  oper 
ating  upon  the  person.  The  leading  charac 
teristic  of  them  all  is,  that  they  operate 
upon  the  person ;  and  there  is,  indeed,  no 
means  of  enforcing  a  pecuniary  punishment 
inflicted  by  such  a  court  as  this,  except 
where  the  prisoner  is  in  custody ;  and 
much  less  certainly  of  punishing  him  per 
sonally  without  having  him  first  in  custody. 

In  view  of  these  considerations,  then,  the 
first  question  before  you  will  be: 

1.  "  Shall  we  proceed  with  the  case  now 
before  us  to  final  sentence  ?" 

If  this  question  should  be  determined  in 
the  affirmative,  upon  the  authorities  cited 
by  th-e  Judge  Advocate,  then  the  second 
question  for  your  decision  will  be : 

2.  u  Shall   we   proceed   in    pursuance  of 
these  authorities,   and  admit   further   evi 
dence  should  it  be  offered,  because  these 
authorities  go  to  that  extent?" 

If  the  prisoner  had  escaped  during  the 
trial  in  a  civil  court,  that  court  would  have 
allowed  th-e  trial  to  go  on  to  verdict  and 
judgment  in  his  absence,  just  as  it  would 
have  gone  011  in  his  presence.  Evidence 
would  have  been  adduced,  and  argument  of 
counsel  heard,  just  as  if  the  prisoner  had 
remained  present.  If  we  take  civil  prece 
dents  for  our  guides,  and  abandon  the  path 
generally  followed  by  military  tribunals,  we 
should  confer  upon  the  absent  defendant 
the  right  to  go  on  to  final  judgment  by  the 
same  stages,  that  he  would  have  been 
allowed  to  proceed  in,  had  he  remained 
personally  present.  The  cases  cited  go  thus 
far 

1  submit,  then,  that,  in  the  first  place, 
the  court  will  not  proceed  to  final  sentence 
in  this  case;  and,  in  the  second,  that,  if 
they  do,  they  will  proceed  by  the  same 
stages  indicated  by  these  authorities,  allow 
ing  evidence  to  be  adduced  in  behalf  of  the 
defense,  and  the  case  to  be  closed  just  as  it 


would  have  been,  had  the  accused  remained 
present. 

The  Judge  Advocate,  in  reply,  said : 

With  respect  to  going  forward  with  testi 
mony  on  the  part  of  the  accused  in  his  ab 
sence,  the  Commission  will  find,  on  an  ex 
amination  of  the  cases  cited — especially  the 
Seventh  Ohio  and  Fourteenth  Indiana  Reports — 
that  a  prisoner's  counsel  has  no  authority, 
the  prisoner  having  abandoned  his  cause,  to 
introduce  evidence  and  make  a  defense. 
Pie  certainly  can  not  do  it  in  a  military 
court.  But  the  authorities  go  further,  and 
say  that  the  Government  shall  not  be  pre 
judiced  by  the  action  of  the  prisoner.  Now, 
I  apprehend  that  if  the  prisoner  was  not 
present  at  the  commencement  of  the  trial, 
and  proof  was  introduced  in  his  absence, 
and  the  case  begun  while  he  was  away,  thai 
the  court,,  seeking  for  truth  and  justice, 
would  decide  that  the  defendant's  counsel 
sJiould  have  the  privilege  of  coming  in  with 
evidence  in  his  behalf;  but  the  case  sup 
posed  is  not  analagous  to  that  now  before 
this  Commission!  Here  the  prisoner  sits  on 
until  the  Government  has  proved  its  case, 
and  if  at  that  stage  of  the  proceedings  he 
abandons  his  case,  he  says,  in  fact,  UI  have 
no  defense;"  and,  having  thus  waived  his 
right  of  a  further  hearing,  he  can  not  come 
in  by  counsel  and  ask  that  he  may  be 
heard,  when  he  is  not  present  for  the  law 
to  act  upon  him. 

On  the  evidence  already  before  the  Com 
mission,  produced  in  the  presence  of  the 
accused,  and  subjected  to  the  cross-examin 
ation  of  his  counsel,  I  submit  the  case,  and 
ask  the  Commission  to  proceed  to  their 
finding  and  sentence. 

The  Commiss.ion  may  grant  to  the  coun 
sel  for  the  accused,  as  a  matter  of  courtesy, 
and  not  as  a  matter  of  right,  the  privilege 
of  putting  in  their  views  on  the  evidence 
before  the  Commission. 

The  court-room  was  then  cleared  for  de 
liberation.  On  being  reopened,  the  Judge 
Advocate  announced  that  the  Commission 
would  proceed  to  their  finding  on  the  evi 
dence  already  introduced,  and  that  no  more 
evidence  should  be  heard  in  the  case ;  but 
that,  as  a  matter  of  courtesy  to  the  counsel 
for  the  accused,  they  would  be  permitted  to 
put  in  their  argument  on  the  proof  already 
submitted. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Monday,  October  17,  at  10  o'clock,  A.  M. 


ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         ) 
-•October  17,  1804,  10  o'clock,  A.  M.  j 


The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

All  the  members  present;  also  the  Judge 
Advocate,  and  the  counsel  for  the  ac 
cused. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

The  counsel  for   the   accused  then   su\> 


TREASON    TRIALS    AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


55 


mitted  the  following  argument  to  the  Com 
mission  : 
Mr.  President  and  Gentlemen  of  the  Commission: 

This  cause  has  been  brought  to  an  abrupt 
conclusion  by  an  unforeseen  contingency, 
which  otherwise  might  have  been  preven 
ted.  No  men  regret  the  fact  more  sincerely 
than  we,  the  counsel  for  the  defendant. 
We  regret  it  both  for  public  and  private 
reasons ;  for  we  have  no  doubt  that  the 
cloud  of  suspicion  which  must  have  arisen 
from  the  testimony  for  the  prosecution,  as 
it  now  stands  unimpeached,  uncontradicted, 
and  seemingly  corroborated  by  the  sudden 
disappearance  of  the  defendant,  might  have 
been,  in  a  good  degree,  if  not  indeed,  al 
together,  dissipated  by  counter-proof  and  a 


•s 


thorough  defense.  Oust  as  little  do  we 
doubt  that  a  more  thorough  and  complete 
investigation  of  the  whole  case,  by  an  ex 
amination  of  all  the  witnesses,  and  a  careful 
discussion  of  the  great  questions  of  law  in 
volved,  would  have  limited  the  apprehen 
sion  of  danger  to  the  peace  of  society  and 
the  stability  of  the  Government,  which 
may  have  arisen  in  the  public  mind  from 
the  testimony  already  before  the  country ; 
and  thus  have  restored  confidence  between 
man  and  man,  as  well  as  general  tranquillity. 
The  absence  of  the  defendant,  however, 
prevents  the  further  development  of  the 
facts  of  the  case ;  and  the  sudden  determin 
ation  of  the  trial  puts  an  end  to  investiga 
tions  of  the  law  applicable  thereto,  which 
we  had  determined  should  be  thorough 
and  exhaustive.  In  both  respects,  there 
fore,  we  feel  that  we  have  reason  for  sin 
cere  and  profound  regret,  for  we  are  under 
the  necessity  of  giving  up  to  you  for  final 
judgment  an  imperfect  cause — the  broken 
fragment  of  what  we  had  fondly  hoped  to 
make  it;  and  upon  this  fragment  you  are 
expected  to  render  complete  justice  to  the 
whole  of  which  it  forms  but  a  part.  While 
this  labor  and  the  difficulty  thereof  are 
yours,  we  shall  follow  your  action  with  a  soli 
citude  for  the  result  far  more  painful  and  pro 
found  than  we  should  have  felt  had  our  own 
labors  been  more  thorough  and  complete. 

Duly  grateful  for  the  privilege  accorded 
to  us  "by  the  Commission  of  addressing  it 
upon  the  'whole  case,  before  it  is  finally 
submitted  for  adjudication,  we  shall  pro 
ceed  at  once  to  the  consideration  of  the 


questions    arising    in    the    record.     These 
questions  are  of  two  kinds: 

I.  Questions  of  law; 

II.  Questions  of  fact. 

I. OF    QUESTIONS    OF    LAW. 

These  again  naturally  divide  themselves 
into  classes.     Thus,  we  have  questions: 

1.  In  relation  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
Commission  to  try  the  defendant  upon  ^th< 
charges  and  specifications  preferred  agains 
him: 


2.  In  relation  to  the  liability  of  the  de 
fendant  to  be  tried  before  any  court  for 
certain  alleged  offenses  charged  against 
him;  and 

1.  Of  questions  in  relation  to  the  jurisdiction  of 
he  Commission,  etc. 

Of  these  questions  we  should  not  have 
poken  at  this  time  had  the  determination 
>f  the  Commission  been  final;  for  the 
question  of  jurisdiction  has  already  been 
ented  and  decided.  The  whole  case, 
lowever,  we  understand,  will  be  reviewed 
Before  any  sentence  can  be  inflicted  upon 
he  defendant;  and  in  order,  therefore, 
hat  the  reviewing  officer  may  have  all  the 
ights  we  can  furnish  upon  this  important 
:>oint,  we  recur  to  it  in  this  place.  And 
ve  feel  that,  whether  this  Commission  shall 
leem  itself  authorized  to  review  its  deci 
sion  in  relation  to  its  jurisdiction  or  not,  its 
nembers  will  not  take  offense  at  our  recur 
rence  to  that  topic,  nor  deem  it  an  abuse 
of  the  privilege  accorded  to  us  of  subinit- 
iing  this  final  address. 

If  this  Commission  has  jurisdiction  to  try 
the  defendant  upon  the  charges  preferred 
against  him,  it  must  he  because  martial  law 
lad  been  proclaimed  before  these  offenses 
were  committed,  and  is  still  in  force  in  the 
State  of  Indiana;  for  it  will  hardly  be  con 
tended  that,  if  martial  law  was  not  in  force 
at  the  time  of  the  alleged  offenses,  or  has 
ceased  to  operate  since  that  time,  this  Com 
mission  can  have  jurisdiction  of  this  cause. 
The  question  then,  which  meets  us  at  the 
threshold  of  this  discussion,  is  this : 

Is  martial  law  in  force  in  the  State  of  Indi 
ana  at  the  present  time? 

Upon  the  right  answer  to  this  question 
must  depend  the  right  answer  to  the  ques 
tion  : 

Has  this  Commission  jurisdiction  of  the  cause 
now  before  it? 

Before  we  can  determine  whether  martial 
law  is  in  force  here  or  not,  it  is  important 
for  us  to  ascertain  what  martial  law  is.  What 
then  is  martial  law,  the  presence  of  which 
alone  can  authorize  this  trial,  and  give  valid 
ity  to  its  results? 

We  will  answer  this  question  by  the  au 
thorities. 

"  Martial  law  is  the  law  of  war,  and  de 
pends  on  the  just  but  arbitrary  power  of 
the  king,  or  his  lieutenant;  for  though  the 
king  does  not  make  any  law  but  by  com 
mon  consent  in  Parliament,  yet,  in  time  of 
war,  by  reason  of  the  necessity  of  it,  to 
guard  against  dangers  that  often  arise,  he 
useth  absolute  power,  so  that  his  word  is 
law." — /Smith  on  the  English  Republj^Book  2, 
ch.  4. 

"  Martial  law  may  be  defined  as  the  law, 
(whatever  it  may  be,)  which  is  imposed  by 
military  power." — 2  Steph.  Comm.  on  the  Laws 


of  Eng.,  p.  561. 

"  Martial  law  is  neither  more  nor  less  than 
the  will  of  the  general  who  commands  the 


56 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


army." — Duke  of  Wellington  in  Hansards  \  underived  power  of  Almighty  God,  must 
Debates  in  Parliament,  (3  series)  vol.  115,  (have  an  origin.  But  from  whom  comes 
p.  880. 


"  Military  law  "  [employed  here  as  synon 
ymous  with  martial  law,~\  "  as  applied  to  any 


this  power  to  put  an  end,  for  the  time  being, 
and.  it  may  be,  forever,  to  the  Federal  and 
State  Governments  of  the  United  States ; 


persons,  excepting  the  officers,  soldiers,  and  and  to  all  the  rights  they  were  organized  to 
followers   of  the  army,  for  whose   govern-  protect  and  defend  ? 


ment  there  are  particular  provisions  of  law 
in  all  well  regulated  countries,  is  neither 
more  nor  less  than  the  will  of  the  general 
of  the  army." — Dispatches  of  the  Duke  of  Wel 
lington,  vol.  6,  p.  43. 

"I  am  sure  that  I  was  not  wrong  in  law, 
for  I  had  the  advice  of  Lord  Cottenham, 
Lord  Campbell,  and  the  Attorney  General, 
Sir  J.  Juves,  and  explained  to  my  noble 
friend,  that  what  is  called  proclaiming  mar 
tial  law  is  no  law  at  all,  but  merely,  for  the 
sake  of  public  safety,  in  circumstances  of 
great  emergency,  setting  aside  all  law,  and 
acting  under  military  power." — Earl  Gray, 


as  cited   by  Hough  in  Precedents 
Law,  p.  515. 


Military 


When  martial  law  is  proclaimed,  courts- 
martial  are  thereby  vested  with  such  a  sum 
mary  proceeding  that  neither  time,  place, 
nor  person  are  considered.  Necessity  is  the 
only  rule  of  conduct ;  nor  are  the  punish 
ments  which  courts-martial  may  inflict  under 
such  authority,  limited  to  "such  as  pre 
scribed  by  law." — Hough  on  Courts-martial,  p. 
383. 

"  In  truth  and  reality,  it" — martial  law — 
"is  not  a  law,  but  something  indulged 
rather  than  allowed  as  a  law.  The  neces 
sity  of  government,  order,  and  discipline  in 
an  army,  is  that  only  which  can  give  those 
laws  a  countenance ;  quod  enirn  necessitas  cogit 
defendi." — 1  Hale  His.  Com.  Law.  Sergeant 
Eunnington's  edition,  London,  1794,  p.  — . 

This,  then,  is  martial  law — "  the  will  of  the 
general;"  "the  arbitrary  power  of  the  king, 
or  his  lieutenant;"  the  means  whereby  "he 
useth  absolute  power,  so  that  his  word  is 


These  questions  must  be  answered  before 
martial  law,  as  insisted  upon,  can  stand  justi 
fied  in  the  presence  of  the  intelligence  of 
the  nineteenth  century.  But  how  shall  we 
answer  them? 

It  has  been  insisted  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate,  that  martial  law  is  in  force  here  for  two 
reasons.  These  are  as  follows  : 

1.  Because  the  President  of  the  United 
States  proclaimed  martial  law  on  the  24th  of 
September,  1862,  in  tke  following  terms: 

"  First.  That  during  the  existing  insurrec 
tion,  and  as  a  necessary  measure  for  sup 
pressing  the  same,  all  rebels  and  insurgents, 
their  aiders  and  abettors,  within  the  United 
States,  and  all  persons  discouraging  volun 
teer  enlistments,  resisting  militia  drafts,  or 
guilty  of  any  disloyal  practice,  affording  aid 
and  comfort  to  rebels  against  the  authority 
of  the  United  States,  shall  be  subject  to 
martial  law,  and  liable  to  trial  and  punish 
ment  by  courts-martial  or  military  commis 
sion. 

"  Second.  That  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus 
is  suspended  in  respect  to  all  persons  ar 
rested,  or  who  hereafter  during  the  rebel 
lion  shall  be  imprisoned  in  any  fort,  camp, 
arsenal,  military  prison,  or  other  place  of 
confinement  by  any  military  authority,  or 
by  the  sentence  of  any  court-martial  or 
military  commission." 

2.  Because  the  enforcement  of  martial  law 
is  essential  to  the  preservation  of  the  life 
of  the  Republic. 

It  may  be  that  we  do  not  state  these  rea 
sons  in  the  order  in  which  they  were  pro- 
.  pounded,  nor  in  the  language  employed. 

law;"  "the  law  which  is  imposed  by  mill- 1  But  the  order  of  statement  can  not  effect 
tary  power;"   "not  a  law  at  all;"  the  "set-  the  questions  they  present;  and    the  sub- 


ting  aside  all  law  and  acting  under  military 
power;"  a  state  in  which  "necessity  is  the 
only  rule  of  conduct;"  and  "neither  time, 
place,  nor  persons  are  considered;"  and 


stance  of  the  reasons  are  here  given  as  pr 
sented.     Let  us,  then,  proceed  to  consider 
them. 

1.  Does  the  Proclamation   of  the    Presi- 


wherein    "the   punishments   which  courts- j  dent  just  cited,   suspend  the  Constitution 


martial   may   inflict"   are   neither   limited 
nor  prescribed  by  law. 

Does  this  law  exist  here,  at  this  moment? 
Has  it  ever  existed  here  ?  Is  it,  indeed,  our 
law  ?  Are  the  people  of  the  State  of  In 
diana  thus  stript  of  all  their  legal  and  con 
stitutional  rights;  and  reduced  to  this  ab 
solute  bondage?  Are  the  Constitution  and 
laws 


and  laws  of  the  United  States,  and  of  the 
several  States  ?  This  question  involves  two 
others,  namely : 

a.  Had   the   President  authority  to  pro 
claim   martial  laic,  and   suspend  the  habeas 
corpus  as  to  the  subjects  thereof,  at  the  time 
he  issued  this  Proclamation? 

b.  If   so,   is    this    Proclamation    still   in 
force;  or,  if  rescinded,  b.as  it  been  followed 


of ::  the    United    States    suspended? 

Have  the  State  Constitution  and  laws  in '  by  a  subsequent  one  of  equivalent  force  ? 
like  manner  ceased  to  operate  ?  If  not,  j  a.  It  will  be  admitted  that  if  the  Presi- 
then,  martial  law  does  not  exist  here.  If  so, '  dent  had  no  authority  to  suspend  the  privi- 
then,  by  what  authority  have  they  ceased  lego  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  throughout 
to  operate?  By  whom 'have  they  been  sus-jthe  United  States,  at  the  date  of  the  fore- 
pended?  Whence  was  the  power  derived;  going  Proclamation,  he  could  have  had  no 
that  has  suspended  them  ?  All  power,  the '  authority  to  proclaim  martial  law  to  the  same 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


57 


extent ;  for  a  proclamation  of  martial  law  in 
volves  not  only  the  suspension  of  the  writ 
of  habeas  corjms,  but,  also,  the  privileges  and 
immunities  of  all  other  laws,  whether  State 
or  Federal,  common  or  statute,  municipal 
or  constitutional. 

Had  the  President  power,  then,  to  sus 
pend  the  privileges  of  the  writ  of  habeas 
corpus  f  It  would  seem  not,  both  on  princi 
pal  and  authority.  During  the  progress  of 
our  country,  this  question  had  been  judi 
cially  considered  and  settled  before  the 
commencement  of  the  present  war ,  and 
the  authorities  stand  thus  on  this  point: 

"  Practically,  as  yet,  Congress  has  never 
authorized  the  suspension  of  the  writ.  It 
is  understood  that  as  the  unlimited  power 
is  vested  in  Congress,  the  right  to  judge  of 
the  expediency  of  its  exercise  is,  also,  abso 
lute  in  that  body." — Sedgwick  on  Stat.  and 
Const.  Law,  p.  598;  Martin  vs.  Mott,  12  Wheat. 
p.  19. 

"  But  it  is  at  any  rate  certain,  that  Con 
gress,  which  has  authorized  the  courts  and 
judges  of  the  United  States  to  issue  writs 
of  )(abeas  corpus,  in  cases  within  their  juris 
diction,  can  alone  suspend  their  power,  and 
that  no  State  can  prevent  those  judges  from 
exercising  their  regular  functions,  which 
are,  however,  confined  to  imprisonment 
professed  to  be  under  the  authority  of  the 
United  States.  But  the  State  courts  and 
judges  possess  the  right  of  determining  on 
the  legality  of  imprisonment,  under  either 
authority." — Rawleon  the  Const.,  pp.  114,  115. 

44  Hitherto,  no  suspension  of  the  writ  has 
ever  been  authorized  by  Congress  since  the 
establishment  of  the  Constitution.  It  would 
seem  as  the  power  is  given  to  Congress  to 
suspend  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  in  cases  of 
rebellion  or  invasion,  that  the  right  to 
judge  whether  the  exigency  had  arisen, 
must  exclusively  belong  to  that  body." — 2 
Story  on  Const,  §  1342. 

The  list  of  American  authorities  might 
be  indefinitely  extended;  but  these  are 
deemed  sufficient. 

The  only  instance  in  the  history  of  the 
United  States  since  the  adoption  of  the 
present  Constitution  in  which  an  effort  was 
made,  prior  to  the  present  insurrection,  to 
procure  a  suspension  of  "the  habeas  corpus, 
occurred  during  the  Administration  of  Mr. 
Jefferson ;  and>  in  that  instance,  the  author 
ity  was  conceded  by  all  departments  of  the 
Government  to  reside  in  Congress.  The 
President  submitted  the  question  to  that 
body ;  and  they  treated  it  as  belonging 
without  question  to  them."' — See  3  Bentons 
Abridg.  Debates  in  Congress,  pp.  488-491 ;  504- 
515  ;  and  520-542. 

The  English  authorities  are  not  less  de- 
cisi\te  of  the  point  in  controversy ;  for  when 
ever  the  king  in  the  recess  of  Parliament 
imprisons  offenders,  and  denies  them  the 
privilege  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  he  is 
under  the  necessity  of  submitting  his  action 


to  Parliament  at  its  next  session,  and  ask 
ing  an  act  of  indemnity  for  what  he  has 
done.  Otherwise,  his  officers  and  agents  en 
gaged  in  such  unauthorized  imprisonments 
of  his  subjects,  would  be  held  liable  for  the 
arrests  so  made.  Such  had  been  the  prac 
tice  in  England  for  near  a  century  before 
our  Declaration  of  Independence.  A  dif 
ferent  course  even  in  England,  could  not 
have  been  allowed  without  giving  full  sanc 
tion  to  the  frequently  assumed,  but  almost 
constantly  denied,  prerogative  of  dispens 
ing  with  the  laws  of  the  land.  The  habeas 
corpus  is  the  creature  of  law — originally  of 
the  old  Common  Law;  but  since  the  31 
Car.  II,  of  the  Statute  Law  of  England; 
and  hence  to  allow  its  suspension  by  pro 
clamation,  would  be  to  permit  the  King  to 
dispense  with  the  laws  of  the  land. 

We  can  not  better  present  the  light  in 
which  these  attempts  on  the  part  of  the 
King  to  suspend  this  great  writ  are  viewed 
by  English  statesmen,  than  by  the  follow 
ing  observations  of  Lord  Brougham  upon 
the  subject: 

"This  is  a  far  worse  measure,"  he  ob 
serves,  "at  all  times  than  the  restriction  of 
public  meetings;  but  the  exercise  of  the 
power  is,  at  least,  under  some  check;  for  a 
bill  of  indemnity  is  always  required  to  se 
cure  the  government  which  has  used  such 
power  of  imprisonment;  and,  as  the  bill 
must  be  carried  through  after  the  alarm 
has  passed  away,  possibly  when  a  new  min 
istry  is  in  office,  they  who  have  occasion 
for  it,  are  exposed  to  considerable  risk, 
if  they  have  at  all  abused  the  power  tem 
porarily  bestowed.  I  have  conversed  with 
ministers  who  have  been  parties  to  such 
proceedings;  and  I  have  invariably  found  in 
them  a  very  natural,  may  I  add  also,  a 
very  wholesome  aversion  to  the  whole 
plan." — Brougham  on  the  British  Const. ,  pp.  283 
and  284. 

In  the  language  of  Mr.  Justice  Wood- 
bury,  "it  would  be  a  little  extraordinary 
if  the  spirit  of  our  institutions,  both  State 
and  National,  was  not  much  stronger  than 
in  England  against  the"  exercise  of  such 
powers.— 7  How.  U.  S.  I.  C.  Hep.,  62. 

It  may  be  well  questioned,'  we  think, 
whether  an  American  Congress  possess  au 
thority  to  pass  a  valid  act  of  indemnity  in 
such  case.  Certain  it  is,  it  can  not  be  done 
without  a  violation  of  the  spirit  of  the 
Constitution,  which  prohibits  the  passage 
of  ex  post  facto  laws  and  bills  of  attainder. 
There  is  little  difference  between  subject 
ing  a  man  to  punishment  for  an  act,  not 
criminal  when  committed;  and  depriving 
him  of  a  remedy  for  a  wrong  done  him, 
after  his  right  to  redress  has  accrued. 
An  act  of  indemnity  is,  in  such  case, 
an  act  of  injustice  and  oppression;  and 
clearly  within  the  spirit  of  the  prohibition 
against  ex  post  facto  legislation. 

But  while  this  objection  to  such  legisla- 


58 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


tion  lies    in  full  force  against    it    in  this  I  with  a  population  of  more  than  a  hundred 
country,  no  such  objection  exists  to  it  in 'million  of  souls. 


England.  There  Parliament  is  omnipo 
tent.  No  constitutional  restraints  are  im 
posed  upon  it.  It  has,  at  all  times,  all  the 
power  that  we  could  confer  upon  a  consti 
tutional  convention.  Hence,  it  is  entirely 
competent  for  it  to  give  legal  validity  to  an 
act  that  was  before  entirely  illegal  and  void. 
Congress  has  no  such  omnipotence,  however. 
Such  power  does  not  exist  in  this  country, 
except  in  the  hands  of  the  people. 

We  are,  also,  led  to  the  same  conclusion 
by  the  contemplation  of  the  manner  in 
which  the  executives  of  the  two  govern 
ments  have  originated.  In  theory  yet,  and 
undoubtedly  original  in  practice  also,  they 
start  from  different  and  absolutely  oppo 


site  principles. 

The  Government  of 


Great  Britain  pro 


ceeds  from  the  King.  He  is  thefons  et  origo 
of  power,  justice,  and  honor.  He  is  im 
mortal — can  do  no  wrong — stands  above  the 
law.  Acts  of  Parliament  are  acceded  to 
by  him  in  language  which  still  implies,  that 
he  but  grants  the  petition  of  the  two 
houses  of  Parliament.  Originally  acts  of 
Parliament  not  unfrequently  became  laws 
by  being  first  presented  to  the  King  in  the 
form  of  humble  petitions  on  the  part  of  the 
two  Houses,  the  prayers  whereof  he  was 
graciously  pleased  to  grant.  Such  was  the 
justly  celebrated  Petition  of  Right.  An 
other  form,  equally  indicative  of  this  claim 
of  absolute  power  on  the  part  of  the  King, 
is  that  of  charters.  In  these  the  King 
speaks  the  law,  thus:  Dedimus  et  concessimus, 
etc. — we  give  and  grant,  etc.  Such  is  the 
style  of  the  Magna  Charta,  and  many  other 
ancient  statutes  of  England,  still  extant. 
This  power  of  the  King  to  grant  charters 
to  corporations  is  still  claimed  as  one  of 
the  royal  prerogatives;  and  may,  at  any  time, 
be  exercised  in  the  creation  of  new  bodies 
politic.  The  great  city  of  London  derived 
its  charter  thus  originally  from  the  King ; 
and  it  was  said  to  have  been  sealed  by 
William  the  Conqueror,  who  granted  it 
with  wax,  which  was 

Bitten  with  his  tooth 
In  token  of  sooth. 

In  order,  however,  more  fully  to  grasp 
the  whole  vast  extent  of  the  power  thus  ex 
ercised  by  the  King  in  the  granting  of  char 
ters  of  government,  it  must  be  remembered 
that  under  them  legislative,  judicial  and  ex 
ecutive  powers  have  been  exercised  amount 
ing  almost  to  absolute  sovereignty.  This 
is  illustrated  in  the  charter  governments  of 
America,  one  of  which,  since  its  separation 
from  the  parent  country,  has  declared  mar 
tial  law.  But  the  power  is  far  more  grandly 
illustrated  in  the  career  of  the  East  India 
Company — a  corporation  created  by  Queen 
Elizabeth,  still  existing,  and  ruling  an 
Empire  embracing  vast  territories  in  the 
fairest  portions  of.  the  earth,  and  teeming 


Starting  thus  with  a  ruler,  in  theory  at 
least,  if  not  in  fact,  absolute,  we  can  only 
arrive  at  a  knowledge  of  his  present  pow 
ers  and  prerogatives  by  a  careful  study  of 
what  he  has  already  granted  to  his  Parlia 
ment  or  people  in  the  way  of  charters,  peti 
tions  and  acts  of  Parliament  in propria  forma. 
and  in  the  private  charters  of  different  cor 
porations,  which  have  from  time  to  time 
been  created  by  him,  both  in  Great  Britain 
and  other  parts  of  his  dominions. 

Whatever  has  been  thus  given  away,  he 
can  not  resume.  It  is  in  the  hands  of  his 
subjects,  and  constitutes  the  body  of  their 
liberties.  The  perfect  sphere  of  a  power 
once  absolute  in  his  hands,  has  thus,  as  it 
were,  undergone,  through  a  succession  of 
ages,  a  slow  but  constant  disintegration, 
and  the  golden  sands  thereof  have  as  con 
stantly  been  gathered  up  and  hoarded  by 
his  subjects,  in  whose  hands  they  have  be 
come  rights.  Thus,  according  to  the  theory 
of  the  British  Government,  rights  are  the 
gifts  of  the  crown  to  the  people.  Whatever 
has  not  been  thus  given,  is  still  in  the  hands 
of  the  King — constitutes  his  prerogative. 

The  Government  of  the  United  States, 
on  the  other  hand,  presents  exactly  the  re 
verse  of  this  picture.  It  is  the  creature  of 
the  people,  in  whom  all  power  is  inherent. 
It  can  have  no  power  which  they  have  not 
conferred  upon  it,  either  by  express  grant, 
or  by  necessary  implication.  In  order, 
therefore,  to  determine  its  powers,  we  have 
only  to  turn  to  the  charter  of  its  creation — 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.  A 
careful  examination  of  that  instrument  will, 
we  think,  satisfy  any  candid  mind  that  all 
the  implied  powers  conferred  upon  the  Gov 
ernment  thereby  must,  in  the  first  place,  be 
ancillary  to  some  substantive  power  ex 
pressly  granted;  and  must,  in  the  second 
place,  wherever  it  is  not  a  mere  matter 
of  form,  become  the  subject  of  legisla 
tion  before  it  can  be  constitutionally  ex 
erted  by  any  department.  This  view  is,  in 
our  opinion,  sustained  by  the  language  of 
the  Constitution,  in  which  these  implied 
powers  are  supposed  to  be  embraced.  Thus, 
it  is  declared  that  ''Congress  shall  have 
power  *  *  *  to  make  all  laws  which 
shall  be  necessary  and  proper  for  carrying 
into  execution  the  foregoing  powers,  and 
all  other  powers  vested  by  this  Constitu 
tion  in  the  Government  of  the  United 
States,  or  in  any  department  thereof." 

It  is  plain  to  our  minds,  from  this  lan 
guage,  that  as  often  as  the  Executive  may 
find  his  powers,  as  expressed  in  the  Consti 
tution,  about  to  fail  of  their  legitimate  pur 
poses  for  want  of  some  ancillary  power  not 
expressly  conferred,  instead  of  seizing  upon 
and  exercising  such  necessary  power  with 
out  an  act  of  Congress  authorizing  him  to 
do  so,  that  functionary  must  first  ask  Con- 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


59 


gress  for  the  required  power.  Otherwise,  he 
transgresses  a  plain  provision  of  the  Consti 
tution.  For,  if  the  power  belonged  to  the 
Executive  prior  to  the  passage  of  a  law, 
why  was  it  provided  that  Congress  should 
have  power  to  make  all  laws  which  shall  be 
necessary  and  proper  for  carrying  into  exe 
cution  the  foregoing  powers,  and  all  other 
powers  vested  b>y  this  Constitution  in  the 
Government  of  the  United  States,  or  in  any 
department  thereof?  If  the  President  had 
a  right  to  exercise  the  power  in  the  first  in 
stance,  why  empower  Congress  to  make  the 
law  necessary  and  proper  to  enable  him  to 
do  so? 

It  was,  therefore,  plainly  not  the  inten 
tion  of  the  people  that  the  President  should 
exercise  any  implied  powers. 

If  we  are  right  in  this  conclusion,  then 
how  can  any  one  concede  a  right  in  the 
President,  as  ancillary  to  his  executive 
functions,  to  suspend  the  privilege  of  the 
writ  of  habeas  corpus  f  If  the  King  of  Eng 
land,  all  the  vast  residuum  of  power  not 
embodied  in  charters,  petitions  granted,  and 
acts  of  Parliament,  must  still  look  to  an 
omnipotent  Parliament — himself  constitu 
ting  one  equal  and  independent  branch 
thereof — for  authority  to  enable  him  to  sus 
pend  the  habeas  corpus,  or  indemnify  his  of 
ficers  when,  by  mere  power,  they  have  al 
ready  done  so,  shall  we  admit  that  a  greater 
power  over  the  priceless  privilege  of  that 
writ,  resides  in  the  hands  of  the  republican 
President  of  the  United  States  ?  And  more 
especially  we  do  so,  when  no  such  power  is 
expressly  granted  him  in  the  Constitution; 
and  when,  by  the  fairest  intendment,  all  im 
plied  powers  are  denied  him,  until  conferred 
and  made  express  by  law  ? 

But  the  privilege  of  the  writ  of  habeas  cor 
pus  is  conferred  by  a  law  of  the  land.  To 
allow  the  President  to  suspend  it  would, 
therefore,  be  to  enable  him  to  suspend  a 
law  of  the  land ;  in  other  words,  to  legis 
late.  But,  as  Executive,  he  must  see  that 
the  laws  are  faithfully  executed ;  and  it  is 
not  for  him  to  select  what  laws  shall,  and 
what  laws  shall  not,  be  thus  executed.  All 
laws  must  stand  alike  to  him,  until,  by  sus 
pension  of  one  or  more,  Congress  enables 
him  to  neglect  or  disregard  those  that  are 
suspended,  in  his  execution  of  the  rest. 

The  Act  of  Congress,  of  March  3,  1863, 
cited  in  our  previous  argument  on  this  sub 
ject,  and  the  President's  subsequent  procla 
mation  in  conformity  therewith,  are  equiva 
lent  to  a  clear  declaration  that  the  power  to 
suspend  the  habeas  corpus  does  not  originally 
reside  with  the  Executive;  and  as  the 
President  approved  that  act,  and  issued  that 
proclamation  under  it,  we  must  hold  that  he 
now  accepts  the  power  from  Congress,  and 
does  not  claim  it  as  properly  pertaining  to 
his  function.  If  this  were  not  the  case, 
then  his  second  proclamation  was  entirely 
unnecessary  —  a  mere  work  of  supereroga 


tion.  If  the  proclamation  of  September 
24,  1862,  had  already  suspended  the  privil 
ege  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  what  occa 
sion  was  there  for  the  proclamation  of  the 
15th  of  September,  1863?— See  32  Stat.  at 
Large,  App.  pp.  6  and  7. 

Hence,  we  hold  it  established,  tha*  the 
President  of  the  United  States  does  not  pos 
sess  an  original  constitutional  authority  to 
issue  such  a  proclamation  as  that  of  Sep 
tember  24,  1862,  in  so  far  as  it  relates  to  the 
suspension  of  the  privilege  of  the  writ  of 
habeas  corpus;  because, 

1.  Precedents,  both  English  and  Ameri 
can,  are  against — precedents  both  legislative 
and  judicial ; 

2.  The  King  of  England  never  exercises 
the  power  without  going  to  Parliament  for 
an  act  of  indemnity,  while  it  may  be  well 
questioned  whether  Congress  has  power  to 
indemnify  the  President; 

3.  The   authority  is  not  conferred  upon 
the  President  by  express ;  and  all  implied 
powers  are,  by  the  terms  of  the  Constitution, 
denied  him  ; 

4.  The    habeas  corpus   exists  by  law.     To 
suspend   it   is  a   legislative   function ;  and 
one  plainly,  therefore,  not  conferred  upon 
the  President ;  and 

5.  Congress  by  the  act  of  March  3,  1863; 
and  the  President  by  his  subsequent  Pro 
clamation,  in  pursuance   thereof,  in   effect 
negatives   the  Proclamation  of  September 
24,  1862;  and  the  assumption  of  authority 
by  which  the  same  was  originally  issued. 

But,  arguing  from  the  less  to  the  greater — 
from  one  of  a  species  to  all — we  conclude, 
that  if  the  President  has  not  authority  to 
suspend  the  privilege  of  the  writ  of  habeas 
corpus,  until  it  is  conferred  upon  him  by 
Congress,  he  can  not  have  power  to  declare 
martial  law,  which  we  have  seen  is,  for  the 
time  being,  the  suspension  of  all  law,  both 
Federal  and  State — municipal  and  constitu 
tional. 

No  lawyer  will  contend  that  the  privilege 
of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  is  placed  upon 
higher  ground  by  the  Constitution,  than 
any  other  constitutional  privilege.  On  the 
contrary,  it  does  not  stand  so  high  as  any 
other ;  for  it  is  provided  that  it  may  be  sus 
pended,  "when  in  case  of  invasion  or  rebel 
lion,  the  public  safety  may  require  it."  It 
stands  alone  subject  to  this  contingency  of 
suspension.  All  other  privileges  of  the 
Constitution  stand  high  above  it  therefore; 
and  yet  we" have  seen  it  stands  above  the 
reach  of  Executive  power  until  Congress  in 
tervenes.  All  other  constitutional  privileges 
stand  above  the  reach  even  of  Congress 
itself.  Among  these  vital  elements  of  pop 
ular  freedom  are  placed  the  right  of  every 
citizen  to  be  exempted  from  answering 
u  for  a  capital  or  otherwise  infamous  crime, 
unless  on  presentment  or  indictment  of  a 
grand  jury,  except  in  cases  arising  in  the 
(land  or  naval  forces,"  etc.;  and  that  other 


60 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


great  right  parallel  thereto,  that  "in  all 
criminal  prosecutions,  the  accused  shall  en 
joy  the  right  to  a  speedy  and  public  trial 
by  an  impartial  jury  of  the  State  and  dis 
trict  wherein  the  crime  shall  have  been 
committed,"  etc.  There  is  no  provision  for 
a  suspension,  in  any  contingency,  of  these 
sacred  rights.  The  power  that  suspends 
them  may,  without  any  further  stretch, 
overthrow  every  other  constitutional  and 
legal  right.  It  can  be  done  by  no  power 
derived  from  the  Constitution ;  for  it  strikes 
down  and  destroys  its  most  sacred  provis 
ions.  The  people  have  never  conferred  any 
such  power.  Congress  has  never  assumed 
to  sanction  it;  but  have,  on  the  contrary, 
expressly  provided  a  method  by  which  the 
public  safety  may  be  secured,  and  the  liberty 
of  the  people  preserved.  The  Act  of  March 
3,  1863,  already  so  frequently  cited,  after 
providing  for  military  arrests,  and  for  the 
suspension  of  the  privilege  of  the  writ  of 
habeas  corpus,  as  to  persons  so  arrested,  pro 
vides  also  for  their  trial  in  a  strictly  consti 
tutional  manner;  and,  if  they  are  not  pre 
sented  or  indicted  by  the  grand  jury  of  the 
proper  district  within  twenty  days  after 
they  have  been  reported  to  the  proper  Cir 
cuit  or  District  Court,  or  after  they  have 
been  imprisoned,  provided  such  grand  jury 
shall,  in  the  mean  time,  have  closed  its  ses 
sion,  for  their  discharge  from  such  military 
custody,  either  absolutely  or  conditionally, 
according  to  the  circumstances  of  each  case. 
Here  is  an  express  limit,  then,  to  the  suspen 
sion  of  the  habeas  corpiis  in  case  of  such  per 
sons  as  the  defendant;  and  an  express  pro 
vision  for  their  trial  wholly  incompatible,  as 
we  conceive,  with  the  jurisdiction  of  this 
honorable  Commission. 

It  is,  therefore,  not  within  the  constitu 
tional  authority  of  the  President  to  declare 
martial  law,  and  thereby  deprive  the  defend 
ant  of  his  right  to  a  constitutional  trial  by 
jury,  upon  an  indictment  duly  presented 
by  the  proper  grand  jury.  Congress  has  110 
power,  under  any  known  or  conceivable 
state  of  affairs,  to  pass  a  valid  act  to  deprive 
him  of  such  a  trial.  Any  such  power,  if  it 
exist  at  all,  as  part  of  the  resources  of  our 
Government,  must  result  to  it  from  a  pres 
ent  military  necessity — a  necessity  in  the 
"  presence  of  which  the  functions  of  Congress 
are  suspended,  and  all  the  powers  of  civil 
government  at  an  end.  Then,  and  then  only, 
when  the  laws  are  silenced  by  the  din  of 
arms,  can  such  a  power  be  admitted  upon 
the  public  theater;  and  it  may  be  well 
questioned  whether  it  is  not  to  be  regarded 
as  rather  the  successor  than  the  instrument 
of  the  Government  whose  constitutional 
organs  have  disappeared  from  the  scene — 
whose  constitutional  functions  have  ceased. 

And  this  naturally  brings  us  to  the  sec 
ond  proposition  we  are  controverting, 
namely : 

2.  Martial  law  is  essential  in  the  present 


emergency  to  the  preservation  of  the  na 
tional  life. 

In  the  discussion  of  this  proposition,  we 
were  informed  that  "  it  is  one  of  the  innate 
principles  of  every  existing  thing,  that  it  ia 
endowed  with  the  right  to  meet  and  over 
come  the  force  that  seeks  to  destroy  it." 
And  this  is  true.  But  how  endowed? 

The  right  of  self-defense  may  legitimately 
call  into  play  all  the  forces  of  the  seff  to  be 
defended.  Has  it  any  claim  upon  any  more? 
any  right  to  extrinsic  aid  ?  "  Every  exist 
ing  thing"  must  exercise  its  right  of  self- 
defense  according  to  the  principles  of  its 
constitution;  and  it  can  not  find  one  thing 
to  defend,  or  one  capability  of  defense  out 
side  of  its  constitutional  existence  and 
power.  The  analogy  to  which  the  prosecu 
tion  thus  appeals,  is  against  the  position  in 
support  of  which  it  has  been  invoked.  If 
it  shall  be  said  that  it  is  not  an  argument 
from  analogy ;  but  an  argument  from  a#,  to 
one  of  the  same  kind — from  "every  existing 
thing"  to  the  Government  as  one  "existing 
thing,"  then  it  proves  nothing  at  all;  for 
the  question  recurs  upon  us :  How  is  the 
"  existing  thing"  known  as  the  Government 
of  the  United  States  endowed  with  the 
right  to  meet  and  overcome  the  force  that 
seeks  to  destroy  it?  Plainly  by  virtue  of 
its  Constitution ;  and  only  to  the  extent  of 
its  Constitution.  Whenever  this  constitu 
tional  endowment  ceases,  there  we  are 
bound,  according  to  the  argument,  to  hold 
that  its  creator — the  people — intended  it 
should  cease  to  live.  If  it  is  not  constitu 
tionally  qualified  to  make  good  the  battle 
for  its  life  without  an  entire  subversion  and 
destruction  of  its  Constitution,  then  it  must 
die.  It  may  be  well  questioned  whether  an 
emergency  requiring  a  declaration  of  mar 
tial  law  in  all  parts  of  the  United  States  at 
the  same  time,  would  not  be  equivalent  to 
the  death  of  the  Republic.  Indeed,  we  can 
not  see  how  it  could  be  otherwise. 

While  we  hold  these  opinions,  we  con 
cede,  on  the  other  hand,  that  there  may  be 
large  sections  and  districts  of  the  country 
in  such  condition  as  to  require  the  exercise 
of  martial  law.  Wlierever  lawless  force  has 
subverted  all  other  law,  there  this  "  rude 
substitute,"  known  as  martial  law,  may 
properly  enter,  and  control  the  relations  of 
persons  to  each  other  and  to  the  Govern 
ment,  until  the  reign  of  law  and  order  re 
turns.  Again,  wherever  lawless  force  con 
fronts  lawful  force  in  martial  array,  and  the 
contest  of  the  two  puts  an  end  to  the  civil 
administration,  there  martial  law  is  called  for 
and  may  properly  be  declared;  or  rather,  it 
exists  without  any  declaration  at  all.  In 
the  camp  of  an  army  in  the  field,  or  near 
the  enemy,  martial  law  may  become  neces 
sary  for  the  preservation  of  discipline,  and 
thereby  of  the  fidelity,  and  even  of  the  ex« 
istence  of  such  army.  But  in  all  such  cases, 
the  "existing  thing"  to  be  preserved  is  more 


TREASON   TRIALS  AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


61 


immediately  the  army  involved  in  the  case 
than  the  Government ;  and  it  must  be  re 
membered  that  an  army  is  always  a  mere 
instrument  of  force — and  to  martial  law  as 
the  sum  of  organized  force — for  that  end. 
But,  even  then,  it  can  only  take  such  an 
extreme  step,  when  compelled  to  do  so,  by 
necessity — a  present  controlling  necessity. 

Now  upon  this  point,  it  seems  to  us,  that 
the  Judge  Advocate  has  already  conceded 
the  question  in  dispute,  for  he  says :  "  The 
Government  stood  on  the  brink  of  a  preci 
pice.  The  conspirators  were  foiled  by  the  mili 
tary  power  of  the  Government.  *  *  *  Self- 
preservation  demanded  that  these  men 
should  be  seized  by  the  military  power. 
Foreseeing  the  danger,  martial  law  had  been  declared 
by  the  President,  and  military  courts  given  juris 
diction."  Upon  these  sentences,  which,  we 
think,  fairly  represent  the  Judge  Advocate, 
are  we  not  entitled  to  say,  that  they  do  not 
imply  a  present  necessity  for  martial  law  ?  He 
informs  us  that  "the  Government  stood," 
i.  e.,  at  some  indefinite  past  time,  ''upon 
the  brink  of  a  precipice."  There  is  no  pre 
tense  that  such  is  its  present  condition 
owing  to  the  defendant  and  his  associates, 
for  he  declares  that  "  the  conspirators  were 
foiled  by  the  military  authorities."  How 
had  they  been  foiled  ?  By  being  "  seized  by 
the  military  power."  From  all  which  it  is 
plain  that  the  necessity  had  passed,  and 
that  this  defendant  might  safely  have  been 
delivered  over  for  trial  to  the  civil  courts, 
which  have  never  yet  been  closed  in  this 
district.  But,  if  the -necessity  that  led  to 
the  organized  declaration  of  martial  law 
did  not  exist  at  the  commencement  of  this 
trial,  or  has  since  ceased  to  exist,  the  juris 
diction  of  this  Commission  has  ceased  with 
it.  But  it  seems  that  the  President's  decla 
ration  of  martial  law  was  prospective — to 
meet  a  necessity  foreseen,  but  at  the  time 
non-existent.  Now,  granting  the  Presi 
dent's  power  in  proper  circumstances — in 
the  presence  of  an  existing  and  controlling 
necessity — to  declare  martial  law,  it  surely 
will  not  be  contended  that  he  may,  without 
such  present  necessity,  fulmine  such  a  Pro 
clamation  in  an  anticipation  of  its  future 
existence. 

In  this  view,  then,  the  Proclamation  was 
premature — two  years  almost  in  advance  of 
the  necessity  in  which  alone  it  can  find  a 
valid  excuse  for  appearing  at  all.  Of  course, 
it  was  not  valid  at  its  date,  on  the  hypothe 
sis  of  a  present  necessity,  and  being  invalid 
then,  it  can  not  be  revived  for  the  present 
occasion. 

That  the  one  sole  ground  upon  which  it 
is  competent  for  a  military  commander  to 
declare  martial  law,  is  the  existence  of  a 
present  and  controlling  military  necessity, 
we  beg  leave  to  offer  some  authorities: 

''  The  only  principle  which  the  law  of 
England  tolerates  what  is  called  martial  law, 
is  necessity;  its  introduction  can  be  justified 


only  by  necessity;  and  its  continuance  re- 
quires  precisely  the  same  justification  of 
necessity;  and,  if  it  survive  the  necessity 
in  which  alone  it  rests,  for  a  single  minute, 
it  becomes  instantly  a  mere  exercise  of  law 
less  violence.  When  foreign  invasion  or 
civil  war  renders  it  impossible  for  courts  of 
law  to  sit,  or  to  enforce  the  execution  of 
their  judgments,  it  becomes  necessary  to 
find  some  rude  substitute  for  them,  and  to 
employ  for  that  purpose  the  military,  which 
is  the  only  remaining  force  in  the  commun 
ity.  While  the  laws  are  silenced  by  the 
noise  of  arms,  the  rulers  of  the  armed  force 
must  punish,  as  equitably  as  they  can,  those 
crimes  which  threaten  their  own  safety; 
but  no  longer — every  moment  beyond  is 
usurpation.  As  soon  as  the  laws  can  act, 
every  other  mode  of  punishing  supposed 
crimes  is  itself  an  enormous  crime.  If  ar 
gument  be  not  enough  on  this  subject — if, 
indeed,  the  mere  statement  be  not  evidence 
of  its  own  truth — I  appeal  to  the  highest 
and  most  venerable  authority  known  to  our 
law.  '  Martial  law,'  says  Sir  Matthew  Hale, 
'  is  not  a  law,  but  something  indulged  rather 
than  allowed  as  a  law.  The  necessity  of 
government,  order,  and  discipline  in  an 
army,  is  that  only  which  can  give  it  counte 
nance.  Nece&sittu  enim,  quod  cogit,  defendiC — 
Sir  James  Mackintosh's  Miscellaneous  Essays  and 
Speeches.  Gary  and  Hart's  edition,  p.  540. 

"Suppose,"  says  Lord  Brougham,  "I  were 
ready  to  admit  that  on  the  pressure  of  a 
great  emergency,  such  as  invasion  or  rebel 
lion,  when  there  is  no  time  for  the  slow  and 
cumbrous  proceedings  of  the  civil  law,  a 
proclamation  may  justifiably  be  issued  for 
excluding  the  ordinary  tribunals,  and  di 
recting  that  offenses  should  be  tried  by  a 
military  court — such  proceedings  might  be 
justified  by  necessity;  but  it  could  rest  on 
that  alone.  Created  by  necessity,  necessity 
must  limit  its  continuance.  It  would  be 
the  worst  of  all  conceivable  grievance — it 
would  be  a  calamity  unspeakable — if  the 
whole  law  and  Constitution  of  England 
were  suspended  one  hour  longer  than  the 
most  imperious  necessity  demanded.  *  * 
*  *  *  *  j  know  that  the  proclamation 
of  martial  law  renders  every  man  liable  to 
be  treated  as  a  soldier.  But  the  instant  the 
necessity  ceases,  that  instant  the  state  of 
soldiership  ceases,  that  instant  the  rights, 
with  the  relations  of  civil  life,  ought  to  be 
restored.  *  *  Only  mark  the  dilemma 
in  which  the  Governor  might  have  found 
himself  placed  by  his  own  acts.  The  only 
justification  of  the  court-martial  was  the  Pro 
clamation.  Had  that  court  sat  at  the  mo 
ment  of  danger,  there  would  have  been 
less  ground  of  complaint  against  it.  But  it 
did  not  assemble  until  the  emergency  had 
ceased ;  and  it  then  sat  for  eight-and-twenty 
days.  Suppose  a  necessity  had  existed  at 
the  commencement  of  the  trial,  but  that,  in 
the  course  of  the  eight-and-twenty  days,  it 


62 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


had  ceased ;  suppose  a  necessity  had  existed 
in  the  first  week,  who  could  predict  that  it 
would  not  cease  before  the  second  ?  If  it 
had  ceased  with  the  first  week  of  the  trial, 
what  would  have  been  the  situation  of  the 
Governor  ?  The  sitting  of  the  court-martial 
at  all,  could  be  justified  only  by  the  proclama 
tion  of  martial  law ;  yet  it  became  the  duty 
of  the  Governor  to  revoke  that  proclama 
tion.  Either,  therefore,  the  court-martial 
must  be  continued  without  any  warrant  or 
color  of  law,  or  the  proclamation  of  martial 
law  must  be  continued  only  to  legalize  the 
prolonged  existence  of  the  court-martial. 
Tf,  at  any  moment  before  its  proceedings 
were  brought  to  a  close,  the  urgent  pressure 
had  ceased,  which  alone  justified  their 
being  instituted,  according  to  the  assump 
tion  I  am  making  in  favor  of  the  court,  and 
for  the  Governor's  sake;  then  to  continue 
martial  law  one  hour  longer  would  have  been  the 
most  grievous  oppression,  the  plainest  violation  of 
all  law." — Speeches  of  Lord  Brougham,  vol.  1, 
pp.  390,  391. 

It  is  distinctly  said  by  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States,  in  the  case  of  Luther 
vs.  Borden,  1  How.,  pp.  46  and  47,  that  "no 
more  force  can  be  used  than  is  necessary 
to  accomplish  the  object,'1  under  a  declara 
tion  of  martial  law.  From  this  we  infer 
that  the  same  rule  must  apply  to  the  adop 
tion  of  force — martial  law — in  the  first  in 
stance. 

"  In  time  of  war,  by  reason  of  the  neces 
sity  of  it,  he" — the  King — "useth  absolute 
power,  so  that  his  word  is  law;"  and  this  is 
martial  law — "the  law  of  war." — Smith  on  the 
English  Republic,  supra.  And  Hale  says  it 
is  ''indulged"  on  account  "of  the  necessity," 
etc.  It  was  never,  the  same  author  assures 
us,  "so  much  indulged  as  intended  to  be 
executed,  or  exercised  upon  others"  than 
soldiers.  "For  others  who  were  not  en 
listed  under  the  army  had  no  color  or  rea 
son  to  be  bound  by  military  constitutions, 
applicable  only  to  the  army  whereof  they 
were  not  parts.  But  they  were  to  be  or 
dered  and  governed  according  to  the  laws 
to  which  they  were  subject,  though  it  were 
a  time  of  war.  *  *  *  The  exercise  of 
martial  faiv,  whereby  any  person  should  lose 
his  life,  or  member,  or  liberty,  may  not  be 
permitted  in  time  of  peace,  when  the 
King's  courts  are  open  for  all  persons  to  re 
ceive  justice  according  to  the  laws  of  the 
land.  This  is  in  substance  declared  by 
the  Petition  of  Right,  3  Oar.  /,  whereby 
such  commissions  and  inartial  law  were  re 
pealed,  and  declared  to  be  contrary  to 
law." — Hales  His.  of  the  Common  Law,  pp. 
54  and  55. 

Thus,  it  appears  that  a  controlling  mili 
tary  necessity  alone  can  afford  a  just  ex 
cuse  for  a  declaration  of  martial  law — a  ne 
cessity  that  closes  the  civil  courts  of  jus 
tice,  or  prevents  the  enforcement  of  their 
judgments  by  the  ordinary  process.  Mili 


tary  necessity  has  been  defined  by  the  Gov 
ernment  in  General  Orders,  No.  100,  1863, 
to  "consist  in  the  necessity  of  those  meas 
ures  which  are  indispensable  for  securing 
the  ends  of  the  war,"  etc. 

Has  any  such  controlling  necessity  ex 
isted  in  the  present  instance?  Does  it  still 
exist?  Have  the  courts  been  closed  and 
the  laws  silenced  by  the  din  of  arms?  Are 
they  still  closed?  If  not,  then,  we  think, 
we  are  authorized  to  say  that  no  necessity  has 
existed,  or  still  exists,  for  declaring  martial  law, 
for  suspending  the  constitutions  and  laws, 
and  proceeding  against  citizens  charged  with 
high  crimes  and  misdemeanors  in  a  manner 
never  before  resorted  toin  this  country  since 
the  first  settlement  at  Jamestown  and  Ply 
mouth  ;  and  one  wholly  disused  in  England 
since  the  abdication  of  James  II. 

It  is  the  fact  of  the  civil  courts  being 
open,  and  justice  having  its  ordinary  course, 
that  distinguishes  a  state  of  peace  in  any 
country  from  a  state  of  war;  and  to  this 
effect  Lord  Chief  Justice  Coke  lays  down 
the  law.  He  says:  "When  the  courts  of 
justice  are  open,  and  the  judges  and  minis 
ters  of  the  same  may  by  law  protect  men 
from  oppression  and  violence,  and  distri 
bute  justice  to  all,  it  is  said  to  be  a  time  of 
peace.  So  when  by  invasions,  insurrections, 
rebellions,  etc.,  the  peaceable  course  of 
justice  is  disturbed  and  stopped,  so  as  the 
courts  of  justice  be,  as  it  were,  shut  up, 
then  it  is  said  to  be  a  time  of  war." — See 
Ooke  upon  Littleton,  249,  b.  n.  1;  and  Viners 
Abridgment,  tit.  Prerogative,  (L.  a.}  War. 

In  view  of  this  great  authority,  is  not 
this  a  time  of  peace  in  Indiana,  at  least  in 
so  far  as  the  administration  of  justice  is  con 
cerned  ?  If  it  is  a  time  of  war.  it  can  not  be 
said,  in  that  respect,  to  be  made  so  by  the 
rebellion — by  any  act  of  the  common  en 
emy.  <Che  courts  are  open,  and  "  the  peace 
able  course  of  justice  is  not  disturbed  and 
stopped."  But  if  it  be  a  time  of  peace,  if 
"  the  courts  are  open  for  all  persons  to  receive 
justice  according  to  the  laws  of  the  land," 
then  according  to  Lord  Hale,  supra,  "  the 
exercise  of  martial  law,  whereby  any  person 
should  lose  his  life,  or  member,  or'  liberty, 
may  not  be  permitted;"  and  this  is  in  sub 
stance  declared  by  the  Petition  of  Right, 
3  Car.  I,  whereby  such  commissions  of 
martial  law  were  repealed,  and  declared  to 
be  contrary  to  law.  And  accordingly  was 
that  famous  case  of  Edmond,  Earl  of  Kent, 
who  being  taken  at  Pomfort,  15  Edw.  II, 
the  King  and  divers  lords  proceeded  to 
give  sentence  of  death  against  him,  as  in 
a  kind  of  military  court,  by  a  summary 
proceeding,  which  judgment  was  afterward, 
in  1  Edw.  Ill,  reversed  in  Parliament. 

*  *  "For  martial  law,  which  is  rather 
indulged  than  allowed,  and  that  only  in 
cases  of  necessity,  in  open  war,  is  not  per 
mitted  in  time  of  peace,  when  the  ordinary 
courts  of  justice  are  open." 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


63 


But  even  if  this  were  a  time  of  "  open 
War,"  and  "  the  ordinary  courts"  of  law 
"were  shut  up,"  and  the  "peaceable  course 
of  justice  disturbed  and  stopped,"  so  that 
"the  judges  and  ministers  of  the  same 
may"  not,  "by  law,  protect  men  from  op 
pression  and  violence,  and  distribute  jus 
tice  to  all, '  has  the  Government  of  the 
United  States  taken  the  necessary  steps  to 
the  enforcement  of  martial  law,  according 
to  the  usages  of  war?  It  will  not  be  de 
nied  that  the  Duke  of  Wellington  under 
stood  as  well  as  any  man  of  his  times,  the 
duties  and  rights  of  a  military  commander 
in  this  respect.  His  whole  great  life  was 
devoted  to  the  profession  of  arms;  and  the 
administering  of  governments  according 
to  the  rules  and  usages  of  war.  Speak 
ing  upon  this  subject,  he  says:  "In  fact 
martial  law  is  no  law  at  all.  Therefore  the 
general  who  declares  martial  law,  and  com 
mands  it  to  be  carried  into  execution,  is 
bound  to  lay  down  distinctly  the  rules,  and 
regulations  and  limits  according  to  which  his 
will  is  to  be  carried  out." — Hansard,  supra. 

Now,  if  martial  law  has  been  declared, 
and  is  in  force  in  the  whole  United  States, 
as  claimed  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  we  have 
been  able  to  find  no  order  whereby  the 
President,  Lieutenant  General,  or  others 
acting  under  either,  have  laid  "down  dis 
tinctly;"  or,  indeed,  at  all,  "the  rules,  regu 
lations  and  limits  according  to  which  his" 
or  their  "will  is  to  be  carried  out."  If  this 
is  not  done,  the  declaration  of  martial  law 
must  become  a  snare  to  entrap  the  un 
wary;  and,  indeed,  the  wary  also;  for 
where  the  law  resides  in  the  breast  of  the 
ruler  until  it  alights  upon  its  subject  in  the 
form  of  a  prosecution  for  a  "capital  or 
otherwise  infamous  crime,"  the  good  have 
no  assurance  of  safety  above  the  evil.  All 
are  alike  insecure.  Such  a  system  would 
be  worse  than  that  of  the  Emperor  Caligula 
who  wrote  his  edicts  in  a  small  character, 
and  hung  them  on  high  pillars  the  more 
effectually  to  ensnare  his  subjects. 

I.  But  that  it  may  not  be  said  that  we 
have  overlooked  the  military  character 
and  power  of  the  President,  we  beg  leave  to 
say.  that  this  discussion  has  proceeded  upon 
a  consideration  of  his  entire  character; 
and  if  this  method  of  considering  his  pow 
ers,  is  not  so  clear  as  one  founded  on  the 
separation  of  his  character  and  powers  as 
a  civil  magistrate,  from  those  belonging  to 
him  as  the  commander  of  the  army  and 
navy,  we  have  been  led  into  it  by  the 
method  in  which  that  functionary  himself 
has  proceeded  in  the  exercise  of  those 
powers.  Thus,  the  Proclamation  relied 
upon  in  this  prosecution  as  a  declaration  of 
martial  /aw,  was  originally  issued  from  the 
office  of  the  Secretary  of  State;  and  is 
published  with  the  acts  of  Congress,  as  an 
ordinary  civil  document  of  the  kind.  Had 
the  President  not  given  us  evidence  of  the 


fact,  that  he  is  in  the  habit  of  distinguish 
ing  between  his  war  powers  and  his  civil 
functions,  this  course  might  not  have  led 
us  to  regard'  the  Proclamation  in  the  light 
of  a  purely  civil  act.  But  it  is  well  known 
that  he  has  issued  several  war  orders 
purely  as  such.  Hence,  we  had  a  right  to 
look  to  the  War  office,  and  not  to  that  of 
State,  for  so  important  an  order  as  that 
which  declares  all  the  provisions  of  the 
Constitution  and  the  laws  suspended  ;  and 
martial  laiv — the  President's  mere  will — sub 
stituted  therefor.  If  the  Proclamation  is 
not  a  war  order  resulting  from  a  paramount 
and  controlling  military  necessity,  then  we 
submit,  it  is  not,  and  can  not,  possibly  be  a 
declaration  of  martial  law;  and  so  we  con 
tend,  martial  law  has  not  been  in  force,  and 
can  not  be  under  it. 

If  it  be  regarded  as  a  war  order  and  in 
force  at  its  date,  has  it  not  been  since  re 
scinded  by  act  of  Congress?  We  think  it 
clearly  has  been,  provided  the  legislative 
function  of  the  Government  has  not  been 
suspended  by  its  operation;  and  it  would 
seem  from  the  President's  recognition  of  Con 
gress,  as  not  suspended,  by  delivering  to 
both  Houses  thereof  sundry  messages;  by 
approving  their  acts;  and,  in  some  in 
stances,  by  afterward  acting  upon  laws 
passed  by  them,  that  he  still  regards  the 
national  legislature  as  still  existing  and  in 
full  life  and  power.  If  it  is,  then  it  may 
prescribe  rules  to  govern  the  exercise  of 
his  power  as  Commander-in-Chief  of  the 
Army  and  Navy.  It  may  say  how  far  he 
shall  declare  martial  law;  and  where  his 
power,  in  that  respect,  shall  cease.  And 
this  it  has  done. 

The  power  to  suspend  the  writ  of  habeas 
corpus  Congress  have  already  given  him,  if, 
indeed,  they  have  power  to  delegate  that  dis 
cretion — a  proposition  not  involved  in  this 
discussion ;  but  one  which  we  should  other 
wise  controvert  upon  authority.  That  sus 
pension,  however,  of  the  writ  of  habeas  cor 
pus,  while  it  provides  for  military  arreste 
and  imprisonments,  is  not  coupled  with 
any  power  of  military  trials.  On  the  con 
trary,  it  is  expressly  provided  that  a  trial, 
in  case  of  military  imprisonments,  shall 
not  be  postponed  indefinitely;  but  shall  be 
had  at  the  next  term  of  the  proper  Circuit 
or  District  Court,  provided  the  grand  jury 
of  the  district  find  an  indictment;  and  if 
not,  then  that  such  court  shall,  upon  proper 
application  made,  discharge  persons  so  im 
prisoned,  either  absolutely  or  conditionally. 
Here,  then,  is  a  legal  limit  to  the  Presi 
dent's  power  even  to  imprison:  and  a  clear 
denial  of  his  right  to  punish,  by  military 
law,  such  offenders  against  the  United 
States.  He  approved  this  limitation  upon 
his  power,  as  asserted  in  the  Proclamation 
upon  which  alone  it  is  contended  this  pros 
ecution  can  proceed.  It,  is  therefore, 
plainly  rescinded,  if  it  ever  was  valid.  And 


64 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


we  desire  to  observe  that  the  law  which 
does  this,  expressly  refers  to  the  same 
ctasses  of  persons  declared  subject  to  mar 
tial  law  by  the  Proclamation  of  September 
24,  1862;  and  provides,  as  already  said,  for 
their  trial,  or  discharge  from  custody,  by 
the  ordinary  civil  tribunals. — Act  of  Congress 
of  March  3,  1863—12  Stat.  at  large,  p.  766, 

<5  O     4,-fc       O          * 

§§  2,  3  et  seq. 

We  conclude,  therefore,  that  'martial  law 
does  not  now  exist  in  the  State  of  Indiana; 
and,  in  fact,  never  has  so  existed ;  because, 

1.  It  was  not  competent  for  the  President 
to  declare,  or  proclaim  it ; 

2.  If  it  ever  were  proclaimed,  the  Procla 
mation  has  been  rescinded  by  act  of  Con 
gress,  with  the  full  approval  of  the  Presi 
dent. 

And,  as  the  existence  of  martial  law  is 
conceded  to  be  necessary  to  the  jurisdiction 
of  this  court,  we  conclude,  therefore,  that 
this  court  has  no  jurisdiction  of  the  defend 
ant  upon  the  charges  and  specifications  now 
pending  against  him. 

[Of  questions  of  the  second  and  third 
classes,  namely : 

II.  In  relation  of  the  liability  of  the  de 
fendant  to  be  tried  before  any  court  for 
some  of  the  offenses  alleged  against  him ; 

III.  In  relation  to  the  nature  and  suffi 
ciency  of  the  evidence  adduced  against  him 
to  support  the  charges. 

These  two  classes  of  questions  are  here 
considered  together.] 

Mr.  M.  M.  Kay  continued  the  argument, 
as  follows : 

In  approaching  the  evidence  of  the  case, 
we  are  almost  subdued  and  awed  into  si 
lence,  by  considering  the  perilous  precipice 
on  which  society,  in  the  North-west,  so 
lately  hung,  if  the  testimony,  in  the  plenti- 
tude  of  its  details,  or  even  in  its  general 
scope,  is  to  be  believed.  But,  when  we  con 
sider  that  much  of  that  evidence  is  open  to 
criticism  from  the  perfidious  relations  which 
one  or  more  of  the  witnesses  bore  to  the 
defendant,  and  especially  that  the  evidence 
is  entirely  ex  parte,  we  are  reassured  that  an 
exalted  duty  rests  still  upon  us,  as  well  as 
upon  this  Court,  to  analyze  the  testimony 
and  apply  it  to  the  case  according  to  the 
eternal  and  unchangeable  rules  of  justice,  of 
truth,  and  of  good  faith;  even  though  the 
defendant  may  have  fled  from  the  perils  of 
his  situation.  And  just  here  we  beg  to  en 
ter  our  protest  against  the  dangerous  legal 
heresy  that  the  escape  of  a  defendant  dur 
ing  trial  and  before  judgment,  carries  with 
it  any  inference  of  either  law  or  fact  preju 
dicial  to  his  innocence.  The  most  that  can 
be  predicated  of  the  fact  is,  that  he  has 
waived  his  constitutional  right  to  be  present, 
in  person,  for  the  remainder  of  the  trial — 
leaving  the  whole  question  of  his  guilt  or 
innocence,  intact,  before  the  Court  to  the 
same  extent  as  if  he  had  chosen  to  remain 
absent  from  Court  in  his  prison.  To  this 


extent,  the  cases  cited  from  Seventh  Ohio, 
Fourteenth  and  Sixteenth  Indiana  go,  and  no 
further.  Such  absence  gives  no  additional 
weight  to  the  Government's  testimony. 
Such  absence  is  no  confession  of  guilt. 
Such  absence,  whether  by  escape  from  cus 
tody,  or  by  voluntary  absence  in  his  prison, 
only  waives  his  right  to  be  present  at  the 
trial  and  at  the  rendition  of  judgment,  in 
the  civil  tribunals,  but  it  waives  no  legiti 
mate  matter  of  defense — no  defects  of  law 
or  evidence  in  the  case  which  the  Govern- 
ment  has  made.  We  will  be  pardoned, 
therefore,  for  dwelling  with  emphasis  in 
denial  of  this  most  unwarrantable  assump 
tion.  The  most  obvious  and  intelligible 
manner  of  treating  the  charges  against  the 
defendant  and  applying  to  them  the  evi 
dence,  is  to  consider,  first,  the  charges 
and  specifications  based  simply  on  the  sup 
posed  character  of  the  secret  organization 
of  which  the  defendant  was  a  member,  and 
the  evidence  applicable  to  the  same — and, 
secondly,  the  charges  and  specifications 
based  on  the  extraneous  acts  and  declara 
tions  of  defendant  and  the  evidence  in 
their  support.  To  deny  that  the  defendant 
was  a  member  of  a  secret  political  society 
of  the  name  charged,  would  be  to  ask  the 
Court  to  discredit,  the  only  corroborated 
testimony  in  the  case.  So  it  may  be  ac 
cepted  as  true,  that  there  was  such  a  society, 
and  that  the  defendant  was  a  member,  and 
at  the  head  of  the  organization  in  this 
State.  But  we  deny  that  the  organization 
was,  by  its  framework,  rituals,  written  and 
unwritten  work,  a  conspiracy,  as  the  specifi 
cations  assume.  We  also  deny,  in  the  light 
of  the  evidence,  that  the  order  is  intrin 
sically  disloyal  or  treasonable,  however 
vicious  and  unjustifiable  it  may  be  on  gen 
eral  principles,  in  other  respects,  and  how 
ever  bad  and  ambitious  men  may  pervert 
and  use  it  to  surprise  a  misguided  society 
and  betray  into  the  great  crime  of  conspi 
racy,  insurrection  and  treason.  If  we  can 
feel  justified  in  assuming  this  position,  in 
the  light  of  the  ex  parte  case  made  by  the 
Government,  how  much  more  fortified  we 
would  feel,  were  we  at  liberty  to  draw  on 
the  supposed  support  which  rebutting  testi 
mony  might  have  furnished  us?  We  feel 
warranted,  from  the  evidence,  in  saying 
that  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty  did 
not  spring  at  once  from  chaos,  nor  from  the 
plastic  hands  of  one  man  or  council  of 
men,  but,  in  its  present  framework  and  pro 
portions,  it  is  the  symmetrical  edifice  of  three 
years  of  experiment,  change,  failure,  and 
elaborate  reconstruction.  Starting  from  the 
rude  home-made  order  of  self-protection, 
thence  matured  into  the  "  Circle  of  Honor," 
"  Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle,"  thence  into 
the  "  American  Knights,"  and  finally  into 
the  "  Sons  of  Liberty."  Springing  at  first 
from  real  or  fancied  necessity,  it  was  at  first 
a  crude,  immature,  stupid,  and  in  many  re- 


TREASON  TRIALS  AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


epects  a  ridiculous  imposture  and  a  gross 
political  fraud  on  the  credulity  of  unsophis 
ticated  people.  Still,  in  all,  or  any  of  these 
stages  and  changes,  we  look  in  vain  for  the 
criminal  element,  or  conspiracy,  or  treason. 
The  members  glided  from  one  name  into 
another  without  any  conscious  change  of 
purpose  or  character,  and  without  assuming 
any  new  obligations,  or  realizing  any  shame 
or  criminality  by  virtue  of  the  change. 
Hence,  the  conclusion  forces  itself  upon  our 
minds  that  there  was  neither  conspiracy  or 
treason  in  the  written  work  of  the  order,  per 
se ;  nor  was  there  any  treason  or  conspiracy 
in  the  unwritten  work  of  the  order,  for  the 
mass  of  the  members,  without  any  new 
light,  passed  from  one  stage  of  the  order  to 
another,  believing  it  only  a  political  society. 
So,  if  we  are  right  in  this,  the  first,  second, 
and  third  specifications  of  charge  first,  fall, 
as  they  are  based  on  the  theory  that  the 
organization  is, per  se,  a  conspiracy.  In  saying 
this  much,  we  do  not  forget  that  the  evi 
dence  shows  much  loose  and  unreliable 
hearsay,  in  regard  to  the  purposes  of  the 
order  in  certain  localities;  but  then  we  re 
member  at  the  same  time,  and  this  Court 
will  not  fail  to  recollect,  that  all  this  testi 
mony  comes  from  the  three  witnesses,  viz. : 
from  Warren  county,  Illinois,  Martin  county, 
Indiana,  and  Kandolph  county,  Indiana,  and 
in  the  case  of  the  latter  two,  from  men  who 
only  knew  the  "  Knights  of  the  Golden 
Circle;"  an  organization  without  system, 
uniformity,  community  of  creed,  and  with 
out  national,  state  or  county  head  to  the 
organization.  The  defendant  can  not  be 
held  responsible  for  any  light,  trivial,  loose 
or  wanton  utterances  of  irresponsible,  discon 
nected  associations,  whose  names  are  not 
even  mentioned  in  any  of  the  charges.  We 
do  not  feel  called  upon,  as  counsel  for  the 
defendant,  to  apologize  for  these  or  any 
other  secret  political  organizations,  and  es 
pecially  in  revolutionary  times  like  these. 
But  we  do  feel  called  upon  as  a  mark  of 
respect  to  this  Court,  and  in  the  interest  of 
a  common  country,  to  place  on  record  our 
unqualified  reprobation  of  all  secret  politi 
cal  orders,  by  whatever  name  or  party  affili 
ation,  as,  at  best,  but  pestilential  hotbeds 
for  the  most  incendiary  political  heresies, 
leading  to  the  worst  fruits  of  Jacobinism. 
It  is  in  vain  for  the  purest  and  wisest  pa 
triot  to  offer  words  of  truth  and  patriotism 
to  the  people,  if  they  conflict  with  the  de 
crees  of  a  secret,  irresponsible,  bloody  tribu 
nal.  Through  the  machinery  of  secret  or 
ganizations,  the  worthless  and  irresponsible 
place-hunters  come  to  the  top,  get  the 
popular  ear,  and  have  more  weight  and 
influence  in  directing  the  popular  mind, 
than  all  the  lessons  of  history,  or  the  ap 
peals  of  our  most  learned,  independent, 
unselfish  and  trusted  public  men.  Who, 
then,  that  has  had  the  sagacity  to  detect 
the  baleful  influence  of  secret  societies  in 


the  whole  political  atmosphere  for  two 
years  past,  can  find  any  apology  or  palliation 
for  them?  We  offer  none.  It  would  be 
too  much  labor  to  go  into  the  evidence  in 
detail,  so  we  can  but  classify  it,  and  be  con 
tent  with  very  general  observations  in  its 
application.  If  we  have  not  erred  in  the 
foregoing  speculations  in  regard  to  the  char 
acter  of  the  order,  then  the  specifications, 
Nos.  1,  2  and  3,  of  charge  first,  are  in  no 
wise  proved.  For  we  may  observe  that  it  is 
not  competent  to  fix  the  character  of  the 
order  as  treasonable  in  Indiana,  by  produc 
ing  an  obligation  of  a  highly  objectionable 
character,  through  a  member  of  a  different 
order,  in  a  particular  locality,  in  the  State  of 
Illinois,  when  the  printed  ritual  of  the 
whole  order  in  Indiana  is  in  evidence  con 
taining  no  such  obligations.  This  remark 
applies  to  Wm.  Clayton,  a  witness  from 
Warren  county,  Illinois,  and  it  applies  with 
equal  force  to  the  verbal  testimony  of  the 
witnesses  from  Martin  and  Randolph  coun 
ties,  in  this  State,  whose  experience  relates 
to  irregular  organizations  anterior  to  the 
existence  of  the  "Sons  of  Liberty,''  and 
revelations  have  no  warrant  in  the  ritual  of 
that  order,  in  this  State.  How  can  Dodd  be 
held  responsible  for  the  insane  ravings  of 
persons  with  whom  he  had  no  connection? 
For  it  will  be  steadily  borne  in  mind,  that, 
before  the  defendant  can  be  chargeable  with 
the  dictations  and  acts  of  others  in  this  or 
any  other  order,  the  evidence  must  estab 
lish  the  essential  preliminary  fact  that  the 
order  is,  per  se,  a  conspiracy,  for  it  travels  on 
the  ground  that  they  are  co-conspirators. 
We  leave  the  fourth  specification  of  charge 
first,  as  falling  within  class  of  charges  based 
on  positive,  independent  acts,  and  pass  to 
charge  second.  The  four  specifications  of 
charge  second,  charge  treason,  if  any  thing. 
The  task  of  disposing  of  the  whole  of  this 
charge  is  easy. 

By  article  3d,  of  section  3d,  Constitution 
of  United  States,  it  is  provided  that  "No 
person  shall  be  convicted  of  treason  unless 
on  the  testimony  of  two  witnesses  to  the 
same  overt  act."  We  submit,  with  entire 
confidence,  that  no  overt  act"  has  been 
proved  by  even  one  witness.  It  is  true,  the 
witness,  Stidger.  talks  vaguely  about  the 
"order"  having  patronized  the  Greek  fire 
machine,  and  about  the  burning  of  Govern 
ment  stores ;  all  of  which  was  mere  hearsay, 
coming  from  Bowles,  which  is  not  admissi 
ble  against  defendant,  except  on  the  suppo 
sition  that  the  order  is  a  conspiracy — and 
even  then  it  would  only  have  the  force  of 
one  witness,  if  that. 

The  same  logic  disposes  of  the  same  wit 
ness'  testimony  in  regard  to  the  starting  of 
couriers  into  Kentucky  to  give  notice  of  the 
culmination  of  the  scheme ;  but  the  cour 
iers  were  never  started.  All  the  specifica 
tions  of  charge  third,  we  suppose,  fail  for 
want  of  proof.  We  do  not  remember  any 


66 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


evidence  on  the  subject  of  arming  and  in 
citing  the  people  to  insurrection,  except 
what  tends  to  support  the  fourth  specifica 
tion  of  charge  first,  involving  a  conspiracy 
to  put  on  foot  an  insurrection.  The  evi 
dence  in  regard  to  the  arms  bought  in  New 
York,  and  shipped  to  one  Parsons,  does  not 
connect  the  defendant  in  any  degree  with 
that  transaction.  The  evidence  of  all  the 
witnesses  touching  the  arming  of  the  order 
is  very  unsatisfactory  and  inconclusive,  even 
in  the  irregular  local  organizations.  And 
as  to  supposed  insurrectionary  character  of 
the  defendant's  official  addresses  and  casual 
speeches,  we  have  only  to  suggest  that  there 
is  not  now,  never  was,  and  in  the  nature  of 
things  never  can  be,  any  test  or  standard  of 
legitimate  debate.  Where  the  press  and 
speech  are  as  free  as  they  have  been  in  this 
country  in  the  past,  more  or  less  abuse  and 
licentiousness  must  exist,  and  must  be  tole 
rated.  And  it  is  respectfully  submitted  as 
a  sound  maxim  in  statesmanship,  and  a  safe 
guide  for  legislators  and  courts,  that  great 
errors  and  abuses  in  this  respect  may  be 
safely  tolerated,  if  reason  is  left  free  to  com 
bat  them.  Why  shall  the  defendant  be  ar 
raigned  for  insurrectionary  appeals,  while 
the  carnival  of  licentious  utterance  goes  on 
all  around  us?  Power,  in  all  ages,  has  been 
jealous  of  a  free  press.  While  on  this  sub 
ject,  we  conceive  that  we  can  do  our  client 
and  country  no  better  service  than  to  com 
mend  to  the  attention  of  the  Court  an  elo 
quent  passage  from  the  speech  of  the  great- 
English  orator,  Sheridan,  on  the  liberty  of 
the  press. 

Mr.  Sheridan  says:  "Give  me  but  the  lib 
erty  of  the  press,  and  I  will  give  the  Minis 
ter  a  venal  House  of  Peers — I  will  give  him 
a  corrupt  and  servile  House  of  Commons — 
I  will  give  him  full  swing  of  the  patron 
age  of  office — I  will  give  him  the  whole 
tiost  of  ministerial  influence — I  will  give 
him  all  the  power  that  place  can  confer  up 
on  him  to  purchase  submission,  and  over 
awe  resistance;  and  yet,  armed  with  the 
liberty  of  the  press,  I  will  go  forth  to  meet 
him  undismayed ;  I  will  attack  the  mighty 
fabric  he  has  reared  with  that  mightier  en 
gine;  I  -will  shake  down  from  its  hight,  cor 
ruption,  and  lay  it  beneath  the  ruins  of  the 
abuses  it  was  meant  to  shelter." 

There  are  five  specifications  under  charge 
fourth,  for  "disloyal  practices;"  a  charge 
suggestive  of  boundless  elasticity,  and  an 
illimitable  field  of  inquiry.  What  is  a  dis 
loyal  practice  ?  When  we  say  that  no  law 
has  defined  it,  no  court  has  expounded  it, 
and  no  precedent  has  illustrated  it,  we  have 
shown  the  dangerous  character  of  a  convic 
tion  under  that  charge. 

As  to  the  two  specifications  under  charge 
fifth,  for  a  violation  of  the  laws  of  war,  is  it 
not  enough  for  us  to  say,  that  the  defend 
ant  was  not  in  the  military  or  naval  service 
of  the  United  States,  and  that  if  the  rules 


and  articles  of  war  are  meant,  he  owes  no 
duty  to  them;  and  that  if  the  international 
common  law  of  war  is  meant,  then  it  can 
only  relate  to  the  rights  and  duties  of  bel 
ligerent  powers,  and  not  to  the  rights  and 
duties  of  government  and  citizen.  We 
have  now  traversed  over  all  the  charges,  and 
recur  to  the  fourth  specification  of  charge 
first.  If  the  evidence  establishes  any  spe 
cification,  it  is  the  one  under  consideration. 
This  charge  rests,  not  upon  the  supposed 
treasonable  character  of  the  order,  but  up 
on  extrinsic  testimony  of  particular  facts, 
and  those  facts  consisting  of  admissions  and 
communications  made  by  defendant  to  a 
Government  Detective  by  the  name  of 
Stidger.  If  this  witness'  testimony  is  to  be 
taken  without  any  deduction,  it  would  con 
vict  the  defendant  of  a  willingness  to  commit 
murder,  as  well  as  treason.  The  witness 
appears  to  be  an  intelligent  and  accom 
plished  detective,  and  all  the  more  danger 
ous  on  that  account,  unless  strictly  honest 
and  impartial.  A  professional  detective  is 
quickened  by  the  same  instincts,  and  stim 
ulated  by  the  same  motives,  that  influence 
even  the  better  class  of  practicing  lawyers 
in  their  zealous  pursuit  of  the  interest  of  a 
client.  Such  a  detective  starts  out  with 
hope,  pride  and  professional  ambition,  all 
involved  in  his  success  in  making  a  case 
against  some  one.  His  zeal  leads  him  into 
every  species  of  sham  intrigue;  his  strategy 
leads  into  the  confidence  of  the  ambitious, 
the  vain,  the  visionary,  or  the  corrupt,  and 
he  sedulously  cultivates  the  germ  of  every 
prurient  weakness  to  folly,  ambition  or 
crime,  so  that  in  the  end  he  has  deliberately 
manufactured  half  the  circumstances  of 
guilt,  and  stands  before  God  a  joint  criminal 
with  the  accused — standing  with  a  guilt  of 
twofold  enormity — the  guilt  of  treachery 
and  dishonor  in  betraying  the  confidence  of 
his  dupe,  and  the  guilt  of  an  accomplice  in 
the  crime  itself.  Or,  to  say  the  least  of  it, 
in  every  case  he  stands  dishonored  in  the 
eyes  of  those  he  has  betrayed,  and  when 
honor  is  lost,  truth  holds  precarious  sway. 
Honor  and  truth  are  the  Siamese  Twins ;  if 
you  sever  the  ligament  that  binds  them,' 
they  sicken  and  die  together. 

The  scheme  of  murder  and  insurrection 
developed  in  that  evidence  is  most  atrocious 
and  revolting,  and  whatever  visionary 
schemes  of  ambition  and  adventure  may 
have  entered  into  the  calculations  of  the  de 
fendant,  we  can  not  believe  that  murder 
was  one  of  them.  And  although  it  consti 
tutes  no  part  of  the  charges  on  which  he  is 
tried,  and  although  a  conspiracy  in  aid  of 
the  rebellion  is  a  crime  of  sufficiently  dark 
a  hue,  we  would  fain  vindicate  his  charac 
ter  from  the  infamy  of  a  foul  murder — a 
deed  so  foreign  and  repulsive  to  every  ele 
ment  of  his  nature.  But  the  evidence  to 
support  this  degrading  accusation  is  sup 
plied  by  the  same  detective,  and  by  the  ab- 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


67 


rupt  termination  of  the  trial,  has  denied  us 
even  the  chance  to  disprove  what  is  said  to 
have  taken  place  in  open  council  in  reference 
to  the  assassination  of  Cofiin.  And,  indeed, 
the  Court  will  be  bound  to  receive  all  the 
evidence  of  the  witness  Stidger,  with  all 
that  hesitation  and  doubt  to  which  the 
treacherous  relations  which  the  witness  bore 
to  the  defendant,  expose  it,  and  subject  to 
the  force  of  the  fact  of  the  abrupt  and  un 
expected  termination  of  the  trial,  operating 
with  exclusive  detriment  to  the  defense.  If 
the  Court  find  the  defendant  guilty  on  this 
specification,  it  will  be  by  giving  full  force 
and  credit  to  the  witness  Stidger,  and  by 
taking  a  different  view  from  us  as  to  the 
true  standard  that  measures  the  character 
of  a  professional  detective,  and  weighs  the 
credibility  of  his  testimony.  If  we  have 
not  done  injustice  to  the  position  of  that 
class  of  witnesses,  he  stands  not  only  dis 
honored,  as  taking  all  the  obligations  and 
vows  of  secrecy  of  the  order,  with  the  de 
liberate  and  premeditated  purpose  to  violate 
these  oaths,  and  to  betray  his  comrades,  but 
he  stands,  by  virtue  of  his  owrn  machina 
tions,  progressing  step  by  step  to  the  clear 
and  confessed  relations  of  an  accomplice, 
morally  and  legally.  The  rule  of  law  upon 
the  subject  is,  that  while  the  testimony  of 
an  accomplice  is  to  be  received,  yet  it  should 
be  received  with  great  caution,  and  when 
received,  is  entitled  to  less  weight  than  the 
testimony  of  other  witnesses. — See  2  2nd., 
652;  4  .M,  128  ;  7  2nd.,  326;  9  2nd.,  106. 

With  much  solicitude  and  anxiety,  we 
commit  the  cause  of  the  defendant,  in  his 
absence,  to  the  learning,  to  the  patriotism, 
to  the  honor,  and  to  the  justice  of  this 
Court.  To  the  learning,  because  the  great 
legal  question  of  jurisdiction,  lying  at  the 
threshold  of  your  inquiries,  is  still  open; 
to  your  patriotism,  because  the  highest  in 
terests  of  public  liberty,  and  tlje  victory  of 
reason  over  passion,  are  in  , your  hands;  to 
your  honor,  because  the  graces  of  magna 
nimity  and  mercy  should  follow  the  weak, 
the  unfortunate,  and  even  the  guilty,  and 
plead  against  the  calamities  of  conviction ; 
to  your  justice,  because  she  sits  blind  to  the 
scenes  of  our  national  drama,  unseduced  by 
the  blandishments  of  power,  and  deaf  to 
the  cries  of  resentment  and  passion. 
M.  M.  HAY, 
J.  W.  GORDON, 
Counsel  for  H.  H.  Dodd. 

REPLY    OF    THE    JUDGE  ADVOCATE. 

Gentlemen  of  the  Commission  : 

I  do  not  propose  to  go  into  an  extended 
argument  upon  the  question  of  jufisclic- 
tion.  The  Commission  having  already  passed 
upon  that  question,  it  would  be  a  vain  and  use 
less  labor  for  me  to  collate  and  review  all 
the  decisions  and  authorities  that  might  be 
brought  to  bear  upon  that  question.  It  is 
not  necessary  to  occupy  the  time  of  the 


Commission  in  making  an  argument  simply 
to  meet  what  the  gentlemen  may  say  upon 
their  side,  for  the  arguments  made  by  the 
counsel  here,  are  not  those  of  the  accused, 
and  are  received  by  the  Commission  merely 
as  a  matter  of  courtesy,  and,  therefore,  do 
not  force  me  to  take  issue  upon  what  they 
personally  may  place  before  you.  I,  how 
ever,  desire  to  submit,  very  briefly,  one  or 
two  points,  and  then  leave  the  case  with  you. 

On  the  question  of  jurisdiction,  volumes 
might  be  written,  and  digests  innumerable 
compiled.  The  question  of  martial  law 
has,  for  centuries  past,  been  a  subject  of 
thoughtful  consideration  by  the  ablest 
jurists;  what  it  was,  and  what  were  the 
necessities  that  justified  it.  Martial  law  is 
born  of  necessity,  and  it  is  but  a  matter  of 
opinion  and  judgment  as  to  when  that  ne 
cessity  exists.  He  who  is  to  judge  of  that 
necessity,  is  the  chief  executive  power"  of 
any  government,  or  the  subordinate  milita 
ry  officers  acting  under  the  orders  of  that 
executive. 

All  the  argument  in  the  case  resolves 
itself  into  one  proposition,  namely  :  that 
martial  law  can  only  exist,  and  does  only 
exist,  in  times  of  great,  controlling,  over 
powering  necessity.  Martial  law,  as  has 
been  well  said,  is  a  setting  aside  of  the 
whole  machineryjof  the  civil  law.  The  civil 
law  must  go  down  before  it,  and  nothing 
but  a  great  and  all-powerful  necessity  should 
be  permitted  to  take  from  the  people  of  any 
land  the  rights,  privileges  and  immunities 
of  the  civil  law.  And  who  shall  be  the 
judge  of  that  necessity?  It  can  only  be 
the  Chief  Executive  who  wields  the  mili 
tary  power  of  any  government.  Congress 
can  not  be  the  judge.  Our  legislative  body, 
Congress,  usually  convenes  but  once  a  year, 
not  oftener  than  twice  a  year,  and,  in  times 
of  foreign  war,  invasion  or  rebellion,  shall 
we  wait  the  expiration  of  that  year  for  the 
declaration  of  martial  law,  to  preserve  the 
life  of  the  Government?  Such  a  course 
would  be  suicidal  and  destructive  of  the 
Government  itself.  The  statement  of  the 
proposition  show's  its  absurdity.  If  the  ne 
cessity  for  action  should  arise  between  the 
sessions  of  the  legislative  body,  where  is  the 
power  that  must  step  in  to  save  the  Govern 
ment  before  that  legislative  body  meets  ? 
The  circumstances  of  the  times  necessitate 
martial  law,  and  when  this  necessity  exists, 
martial  law  must  be  proclaimed,  and  the 
civil  law,  for  the  time  being,  remains  silent, 
to  be  revived  in  its  native  force  when  th." 
necessity  for  proclaiming  martial  law  shall 
have  passed  away.  The  civil  law  sleeps;  it 
is  not  dead. 

In  this  case  the  President  has  not  said 
that  martial  law  shall  be  proclaimed  through 
the  length  and  breadth  of  the  land.  On 
this  point  the  counsel  for  the  accused  have 
gone  astray.  The  President  has  not  de 
clared  that  the  whole  machinery  of  the  civil 


68 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


law  shall  remain  dormant,  that  there  shall :  as  powerless  as  any  private  citizen  in  the 
not  be  any  punishment  of  civil  offenses  in  j  land.  It  is  because  the  foundations  of  sc- 
our  courts.  But  he  has  said,  that  when  men  |  ciety  are  broken  up,  that  we  are  forced  to 
step  in  and  undertake  to  assist  this  great  \  recognize  the  necessities  that  grow  out  of 
rebellion,  by  acting  in  concert  with  these  this  new  order  of  things.  The  state  of 
armed  rebels  against  the  Government,  thus  things  now  existing  in  this  country,  has 
threatening  the  life  of  the  nation,  that  they  ,  never  before  been  exactly  paralleled  in  any 


then  clothe  themselves  with  a  certain  mili 
tary  garb  that  brings  them  within  military 
law,  and  that  the  military  law  shall  act  upon 
them,  and  thus  far  martial  law  is  proclaimed; 


age  of  the  world.  The  whole  country  has 
been  taken  possession  of  by  military  force. 
Why  ?  Because,  and  only  because  of  its 
necessity.  To  preserve  even  the  form  of 


no  further.  When  men,  for  instance,  here  j  government,  it  was  necessary  that  the  whole 
in  the  State  of  Indiana,  undertake  to  bring  j  force  and  energy  of  the  nation  should  be 
about  an  insurrection,  undertake  to  release  j  employed  against  those  who  were  arraying 
and  arm  these  hordes  of  rebel  prisoners,  themselves  against  it.  The  whole  nation, 
here  in  our  midst,  they  then  become  part  j  each  man  individually,  and  all  collectively, 


and  parcel  of  that  rebel  army,  and  make 
themselves  subject  to  military  law.  They 
are  as  soldiers  for  the  time  being,  and,  like 
them,  subject  to  military  regulations.  Take 
the  case  as  it  exists.  We  are  engaged  in  a 
war ;  and  the  ways  of  war  are  not  the  ways 
of  peace.  That  which  may  be  lawful  in 
times  of  war  is  unlawful  in  times  of  peace. 
Let  me  illustrate.  Would  it  be  lawful  in 
times  of  peace  for  the  military  commander 
of  this  district  to  go  out  to  the  ground  on 
which  Camp  Morton  now  stands,  and  take 
possession  of  five  hundred  acres  of  land  on 
which  to  build  structures,  in  which  to  con 
fine  these  rebel  soldiers?  Would  it,  in  times 
of  peace,  be  lawful  for  him  to  seize  and  take 
possession  of  a  house  to  occupy  as  his  head 
quarters  ?  Would  it  be  lawful  for  him  to 
go  upon  another  man's  land,  and  camp  his 
troops,  and  seize  his  corn  and  provisions  ? 
Would  not  each  single  act  be  a  trespass,  for 
which  he  would  be  liable  to  prosecution  ? 
But  it  is  no  crime  under  the  circumstances 
supposed,  that  is  in  times  of  war.  And  it  is 
no  higher  assertion  of  military  authority  to 
take  possession  of  the  person,  than  it  would 
be  to  seize  that  person's  property  for  mili 
tary  service,  if  the  safety  of  the  Government 
demanded  it.  All  these  things  come  as  a 
concomitant  to  a  state  of  war.  Again,  in 
times  of  peace,  do  we  recognize  or  know  of  any 
such  officer  as  the  Commanding  General  of  a 
Department?  Take,  for  instance,  the  Com 
manding  General  of  this  Department,  Gen 
eral  Hooker,  who  commands  the  States  of 
Ohio,  Illinois,  Indiana,  and  Michigan — not 
one  of  which  States  is  in  rebellion;  what  are 
his  powers  and  duties  ?  Is  he  simply  a 
man  of  straw?  Is  his  position  recognized 
by  the  civil  law  ?  And  yet  will  any  man 
claim  that  he  can  be  prosecuted  for  any  acts 
done  in  the  exercise  of  his  authority,  not 
one  of  which  is  recognized  by  the  civil  law, 
and  but  for  the  condition  of  war,  would  be 
without  legal  sanction.  The  position  of 
General  Hovey  is  another  illustration.  At 
present  he  exercises  in  his  military  super 
vision  as  much  power  over  the  people  of  the 
State  as  the  Governor  himself,  and  yet  in 
times  of  peace,  his  office  has  no  existence. 
If  peace  were  declared  to-day,  he  would  be 


constituted  a  physical  power  that  might  be 
used  to  preserve  the  nation  against  its  ene 
mies.  The  civil  rights  of  the  citizen  became 
dead  for  the  time  being,  if  necessary  to  pre 
serve  the  life  of  the  nation. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused,  in  quoting 
my  arguments  respecting  the  jurisdiction 
of  this  Commission,  evidently  misconstrued 
my  remarks  as  to  each  existing  thing  exer 
cising  its  rights  of  self-defense  according  to 
the  law  of  its  organization.  I  am,  for  in 
stance,  organized  and  created  as  a  single,  in 
dividual  thing,  without  weapons  or  means 
of  defense,  save  my  hands,  and  if  my  life 
were  threatened  by  an  antagonist,  1  must 
not,  according  to  the  theory  of  the  gentle 
man,  take  up  a  club  or  any  weapon  to  de 
fend  that  life,  or  call  in  the  aid  of  my 
friend,  but  I  must  defend  it  according  to 
the  law  of  my  organization,  without  any  ex 


trinsic  aid. 
apparent? 


Is  not  the  fallacy  of  the  position 
Self-defense,    self-preservation 


inevitably  carries  with  it  every  means  which 
that  power  can  bring  to  assist  in  that  self-de 
fense  and  self-preservation.  Just  as  defensive 
war  may  become  offensive-defensive  war.  For 
the  sake  of  saving  yourself  from  invasion, 
you  may  invade  the  enemy,  and  yet  it  is  but 
a  defensive  war.  Each  individual — every  ex 
isting  unity  or  community — is  endowed,  by 
the  very  laws  of  its  creation,  with  the  power 
and  the  right  to  defend  its  own  existence. 
That  right  is  not  lessened  when  individuals 
join  together  and  make  communities.  A 
man  who  has  that  right  of  self-protection 
does  not,  by  joining  himself  to  fifty  or  a  hun 
dred  others,  make  his  individual  right  less 
sacred;  and  when  communities  combine  to 
form  a  government,  the  life  of  that  govern 
ment  is  at  least  as  sacred  as  the  life  of  an 

the 


individual.  In  defending  the 
nation  and  its  constitution,  necessity  be 
comes  the  sole  law.  Whatever  is  necessary 
to  be  done,  the  Government  is  not  only 
authorized,  but  is  in  duty  bound  to  do.  1 
accept  it  as  a  maxim  that  the  only  criterion 
for  the  exercise  of  martial  law  is  its  neces 
sity.  Whenever  an  officer,  or  the  Chief 
Executive  of  this  Government,  acts  with 
out  that  necessity,  he  commits  an  act 
unauthorized;  but  so  long  as  he  keeps 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


69 


within  that  necessity,  the  law  and  the 
people — the  givers  of  all  power — will  indorse 
him. 

It  was  not  my  intention  to  refer  to  the 
exigences  that  might  necessitate  martial  law, 
or  to  the  distinctions  between  martial  law 
and  military  law — a  distinction  often  disre 
garded — but  I  beg  to  submit  the  following 
from  the  New  American  Cyclopedia  which 
very  clearly  states  the  distinction: 

"Martial  law  has  often  been  confounded 
with  military  law,  but  the  two  are  very  dif 
ferent.  Military  law,  with  us,  consists  of 
the 'Rules  and  Articles  of  War,'  and  other 
statutory  provisions  for  the  government  of 
military  persons,  to  which  may  be  added 
the  unwritten  or  common  law  of  the  'usage 
and  custom  of  military  service.'  It  exists 
equally  in  peace  and  in  war,  and  is  as  fixed 
and  definite  in  its  provisions  as  the  admi 
ralty,  ecclesiastical,  or  any  other  branch  of 
law,  and  is  equally,  with  them,  a  part  of  the 
general  law  of  the  land.  But  in  the  words 
of  Chancellor  Kent,  'martial  law  is  quite  a 
distinct  thing.'  It  exists  only  in  the  time 
of  war,  and  originates  in  military  necessity. 
It  derives  no  authority  from  the  civil  law, 
(using  the  term  in  its  more  general  sense,) 
nor  assistance  from  the  civil  tribunals,  for 
it  overrules,  suspends,  and  replaces  both.  It 
is,  from  its  very  nature,  an  arbitrary  power, 
and  extends  to  all  the  inhabitants  (whether 
civil  or  military)  of  the  district  where  it  is 
in  force.  It  has  been  used  in  all  countries, 
and  by  all  governments,  and  it  is  as  neces 
sary  to  the  sovereignity  of  a  State  as  the 
power  to  declare  and  make  war.  The  right 
to  declare,  apply  and  enforce  martial  law,  is 
one  of  the  sovereign  powers,  and  resides  in 
the  governing  authority  of  the  State,  and  it 
depends  on  the  Constitution  of  the  State 
whether  restrictions  and  rules  are  to  be 
adopted  for  its  application,  or  whether  it  is 
to  be  exercised  according  to  the  exigences 
which  called  it  into  existence.  But  even 
when  left  unrestricted  by  constitutional  or 
statutory  law,  like  the  power  of  a  civil  court 
to  punish  contempts,  it  must  be  exercised 
with  due  moderation  and  justice;  and,  as  a 
permanent  necessity  alone  can  call  it  into 
existence,  so  must  its  exercise  be  limited  to 
such  times  and  places  as  this  necessity  may 
require ;  and,  moreover,  it  must  be  governed 
by  the  rules  of  general  public  law,  as  applied 
to  a  state  of  war.  It,  therefore,  can  not  be 
despotically  or  arbitrarily  exercised  any 
more  than  any  other  belligerent  right  can 
be  so  exercised."  (Cushrngs  Opinions  of  U. 
8.  Attorney  General,  vol.  8,  p.  305;  Wolners 
Jus  Gentium,  sec.  865;  Grotius  De  Jus  Bel.,  B. 
lib.  3,  cap.  8;  Kluber  Dicit  des  Gens,  sec.  255; 
O  P>rien  s  American- Military  I  jaw,  p.  23;  Hal 
leek's  International  Law  and  Laws  of  War,  p. 
303.) 

It  is  one  of  the  concomitants  of  an  army, 
as  the  counsel  for  the  accused  well  remark 
ed,  that  wherever  that  army  goes,  it  carries 


with  it  martial  law;  and  just  to  the  extent 
that  we  here  are  under  the  rule  of  an  army, 
just  to  that  extent  are  we  subject  to  the 
rules  of  martial  law,  without  any  proclama 
tion  of  the  President  on  the  subject.  And 
further,  martial  law,  in  my  judgment,  is  not 
a  thing  to  be  authorized  by  Congress.  The 
decision  of  our  ablest  legal  authorities  may 
be  shown  to  that  effect.  It  is  an  Executive 
power,  only  to  be  exercised  under  circum 
stances  of  all-controlling  necessity,  by  the 
Commander-in-Chief,  or  the  executive  power 
of  the  Government.  It  is  one  of  the  preroga 
tives  of  the  Executive,  and  it  can  only  be 
used  by  him  and  his  subordinates — his  lieu 
tenants. 

If,  for  instance,  the  commanding  officer 
of  Kentucky,  acting  under  the  authority 
of  the  Chief  Executive,  the  President,  con 
ceives  there  is  a  necessity  for  martial  law 
to  be  declared  in  his  district,  he  can  de 
clare  it  at  his  will ;  but  his  superior  will 
hold  him  responsible  that  he  did  not  de 
clare  martial  law  till  there  was  a  necessity 
for  it.  So  with  General  Hovey  and  his  or 
ders  while  commanding  in  this  District. 

Martial  law  has,  during  the  war,  been  de 
clared  by  almost  every  commanding  Gen 
eral  in  the  field ;  and  the  power  and  the 
right  to  do  so,  have  not,  to  my  knowledge, 
ever  been  questioned  in  any  department, 
and  no  prosecution  has  been  known  for  the 
unlawful  exercise  of  that  power  by  any 
military  commander. 

When  General  Hovey  convened  this  Com 
mission  within  the  limits  of  his  jurisdiction, 
and  committed  the  case  of  Harrison  H. 
Docld,  the  accused,  to  this  Commission,  with 
orders  to  try  it,  he,  by  virtue  of  his  mili 
tary  power,  acting  under  the  authority  that 
was  given  to  him  by  the  Commander-in- 
Chief  of  the  army,  namely,  the  President 
of  the  United  States,  he  suspended  the 
civil  law,  and  put  in  operation  the  military 
or  martial  law.  The  officers  of  this  Com 
mission  could  not,  under  the  oath  that  they 
have  taken,  refuse  to  obey  the  orders  of  the 
officer  placed  over  them.  They  could  not 
stop  and  go  back  of  that  order,  and  refuse 
to  hear  and  determine  this  case. 

Benet,  who  is  our  best  authority  upon  mil 
itary  law,  says,  p.  13:  "In  the  United 
States,  martial  law  is  a  thing  not  mentioned 
by  name,  and  scarcely  as  much  as  hinted 
at,  in  the  Constitution  and  statutes.  The 
former  declares  that  '  the  privilege  of  the 
writ  of  habeas  corpus  shall  not  be  suspend 
ed  unless,  when,  in  cases  of  rebellion  or  in 
vasion,  the  public  safety  may  require  it.'  " 

Upon  that  point  much  might  be  said,  in 
connection  with  the  condition  of  Indiana, 
as  to  whether  the  public  safety  did  require 
the  suspension  of  habeas  corpus,  and  the 
declaration  of  martial  law.  I  did  not  sup 
pose  there  were  two  opinions  on  that  ques 
tion. 

Benet    continues :    "The    opinion   is  ex- 


70 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


pressed  by  the  commentators  on  the  Con-  j  nothing   certainly  can  be  said  for  him  by 

j  •  i       i  •  *  i       j_    j_i_  .        •  _.i-  j.  „  /i    j.  i  •*.     T_  *_  _  _o     - 


stitution,  that  the  right  to  suspend  the  writ 
of  habeas  corpus,  and  also  that  of  judging 
when  the  exigency  has  arisen,  belong  ex 
clusively  to  Congress.  But  the  rebellion  or 
invasion  may  demand  such  suspension  during 
arecessof  the  national  legislature, and, by  the 
laws  of  war,  the  executive  has  then  the  right 
to  assume  the  power  for  the  public  safety. 
The  relation  between  the  proclamation  of 
martial  law  and  the  suspension  of  the  writ 
of  habeas  corpus,  is  extremely  intimate;  al- 


his  act  of  escape. 

The  counsel  who  last  addressed  the  Com 
mission,  contends  that  the  organization 
known  as  the  Order  of  American  Knights, 
or  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty,  is  not 
a  conspiracy.  Then  what  is  a  conspiracy  ? 
As  defined  by  law  writers,  it  is  a  combina 
tion  or  agreement  between  two  or  more 
persons  to  do  an  illegal  act,  or  to  do  a  legal 
act  in  an  illegal  manner.  If  we  take  this 
association  and  try  it  by  this  rule,  what  do 


though  it  is  but  one  of  its  consequences,  and  we  find  ?     A  body  of  men  who  were  bound 


by  no  means  the  largest  or  gravest, 
according  to  every  definition  of  martial  law, 
it  suspends,  for  the  time  being,  all  the  laws  of 
the  land,  and  substitutes  in  their  place  no 
law ;  that  is,  the  mere  will  of  the  military 
commander. "  Here  is  another  sentence  in 
which  much,  very  much,  is  included.  I  cite 
it,  that  it  may  be  reflected  upon  : 

u  It  must  be  observed,  however,  that  many  of 
fenses  which  in  time  of  peace  are  civil  offenses, 
become  in  time  of  war  military  offenses,  and  are, 
to  be  tried  by  a  military  tribunal,  even  in  places 
where  civil  tribunals  exist."  p.  16. 

1  will  only  add  a  word  further  in  respect 
to  the  necessity  that  existed  for  martial 


together  by  the  most  binding  of  oaths — the 
oath  itself  an  unlawful  thing,  and  the  very 
organization  of  the  society  being  unlawful 
in  and  of  itself — recognizing  military  as 
well  as  civil  officers  unknown  to,  and  ID 
violation  of,  the  Constitution  and  laws  of 
the  land.  And  for  what  purpose  does  the 
proof  show  this  organization  to  have  ex 
isted?  For  the  express  purpose  of  defeat 
ing  and  overthrowing  the  Government, 
while  engaged  in  war  against  its  enemies, 
for  the  purpose  of  aiding  those  enemies  in 
their  rebellion  against  the  duly  constituted 
authorities  of  the  land.  Other  witnesses 
swear  it  was  for  the  additional  purpose  of 


law  to  step  in  at  the  time  it  did,  here  in  the 

State  of  Indiana,     It   may  be   asked,    did 

the  necessity  exist  ?     The  proof  shows  that  j  pose  of  the  organization  was  to  resist  the  Gov- 

there  existed  in  this  State  an  organization  !  eminent  in  its  efforts  to  suppress  the  exist- 


resisting  the  draft;  but  every  witness  testi 
fies  directly  to  the  fact,  that  the  express  pur- 


numbering  from  fifty  to  eighty  thousand 
men,  military  in  its  character,  and,  about 
two-thirds  armed,  ready  at  any  time  to  be 
called  out  to  obey  the  orders  of  their  su 
periors,  regardless-of  the  law  and  authori 
ties  of  the  United  States.  That  organiza 
tion  was  armed  and  drilled  with  the  avowed 
purpose  of  assisting  the  enemy  as  against 
the  Government.  This  organization  was 
ready  at  any  moment  to  be  called  into  the 
field,  to  release  in  our  midst  large  numbers 
of  rebel  prisoners,  feebly  guarded.  Did 
not  such  a  state  of  things  warrant  the  in 
terference  of  the  military  power  to  stop  this 
insurrection,  and  the  possible  bloodshed 
and  anarchy  that  might  have  ensued  here 
at  our  very  door? 

I  now  pass  for  a  moment  to  the  fact  of 
the  absence  of  the  prisoner.  While  I  ad 
mit  that  his  absence  should  not  prejudice 
him  in  the  consideration  of  the  proof,  nor 
should  it  be  taken,  perhaps,  as  any  confes 
sion  of  guilt.  When,  however,  the  counsel 
attempt  to  argue  on  the  force  of  the  testi 
mony  that  might  have  been  introduced  by 
the  defense,  they  touch  upon  ground  which 
they  have  no  right  to  approach.  This  Com 
mission  does  not  know  that  any  more  proof 
could  come  before  it.  They  must  consider 
the  evidence  they  have  heard,  and  only 
that.  The  accused,  by  his  absence,  as  I 
have  before  said,  waves  his  right  to  any  re 
butting  testimony,  and  says,  in  fact,  "There 
is  no  further  defense  to  be  offered  in  this 
case."  If  nothing  is  confessed  against  him, 


ing  rebellion.  Is  this  lawful,  or  unlawful  ? 
Is  this  conspiracy,  or  is  it  not?  It  seems  to 
me  that  one  moment's  consideration  of  the 
principles  upon  which  this  society  was  or 
ganized,  would  determine  the  question  be 
yond  dispute.  It  needs  no  argument.  I 
refer  the  Commission  to  the  proof. 

The  counsel  say  further  that  while  this 
organization  was  vicious,  it  was  not  treason 


able.     Why,    my 


what    is    treason  ? 


What  does  a  traitor  do  but  try  to  destroy 
his  Government  ?  Is  it  treason  to  organ 
ize  a  society,  the  members  of  which  take  a 
solemn  oath  that  when  the  enemies  of  their 
Government  come  over  into  their  State,  they 
will  receive  them  as  friends,  shake  hands 
with  them,  and,  as  opportunities  offer,  give 
them  information  from  time  to  time  of  the 
movements  of  the  Government  forces  ?  Is 
it  treason  to  assist  in  turning  loose  upon 
us  the  tigers  that  we  have  imprisoned  here 
in  our  very  midst,  to  arm  those  very  men 
who  are  our  avowed  enemies,  and  the  en 
emies  of  our  Government  ?  Is  it  trea 
son  to  endeavor  to  organize  those  rebel 
prisoners  into  a  formidable  military  body 
to  assist  in  the  general  rebellion  against 
the  Government?-  Is  it  treason  tor-send 
messengers  to  the  enemies  of  the  Govern 
ment,  to  tell  them  of  the  number  of  friends 
they  have  here  in  a  loyal  State,  and  assure 
them  of  sympathy  and  support?  I  can  not 
conceive  how*  a'  doubt  for  one  moment  can 
exist  as  to  the  treasonable  nature  of  these 
designs. 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


71 


I  wish  to  say  one  word  with  respect  to  the 
testimony  of  the  witness  Stidger.  No  mem 
ber  of  this  Commission,  and  I  think  I  may  say 
that  no  person  sat  in  this  hall,  who  did  not 
believe  that  the  witness  testified  to  the 
truth.  If  h£  had  not  testified  to  the  truth, 
he  was  a  witness  who  could  more  easily  have 
been  convicted  of  falsehood  than  any  one 
brought  upon  the  stand.  There  was  not  a 
fact  to  which  he  testified,  for  which  he  did  not 
give  the  place,  date  and  person.  When  a  wit 
ness  does  that,  every  lawyer  knows  that  you 
can  trace  up  that  man's  history  in  his  cross- 
examination.  If  Captain  Jones  did  not  send 
him  on  a  certain  day  to  a  certain  person,  to 
have  a  certain  conversation,  nothing  would 
be  easier  than  for  Captain  Jones  to  be  called 
upon  the  stand  to  testify  to  the  fact.  If  the 
witness  Stidger  had  not  met  Bowles  at  the 
time  and  place  he  mentions,  and  have  the 
conversation  narrated,  it  would  be  easy  to 
show  that  Bowles  was  elsewhere  at  the  time. 
If  he  did  not  meet  Dodd,  and  talk  with  him, 
at  the  time  and  place  he  says  he  did,  how 
easily  it  could  be  refuted!  When  Stidger 
came  upon  the  stand,  he  expected  that  he 
was  to  be  met  by  every  possible  proof  that 
could  be  brought  against  him.  This  witness 
testified  that  when  he  entered  into  this  or 
ganization,  it  was  with  the  express  intent  and 
determination  to  develop  its  end  and  pur 
poses.  True,  he  was  a  Government  detective ; 
he  states  that  he  was  so  hired  and  employ 
ed.  As  a  rule,  I  have  no  kind  of  fellowship 
or  sympathy  with  this  class  of  men.  But  I 
believe  that  such  a  work  could  be  engaged 
in  and  accomplished  with  a  good  intent  and 
purpose.  It  is  a  species  of  strategy  fully  just 
ified  by  the  circumstances  of  the  case,  and 
is  not  unlike  that  to  which  our  command 
ing  Generals  in  the  field  often  resort  in 
their  efforts  to  deceive  the  enemy.  They 
send  false  messages,  write  and  forward 
false  missives,  on  purpose  to  mislead  them. 
They  employ  every  means  in  their  power  to 
induce  them  to  believe  in  and  rely  upon  a 
certain  state  of  things,  the  opposite  of  that 
which  really  exists.  Stidger  engaged  in  the 
work  of  revealing  the  designs  of  this  treason 
able  organization,  with  the  express  purpose 
of  giving  information  to  the  Government 
and  saving  bloodshed,  and  possibly  National 


disaster.  Such  a  man  engaged  in  such  a 
cause,  and  for  such  a  purpose,  can  not  be 
called  an  accomplice.  Such  a  man  can  not 
be  called  a  criminal,  or  a  scoundrel.  On  the 
contrary,  he  perils  his  life  to  obtain  facts 
which  have  proved  of  the  greatest  import 
ance  to  the  cause  of  justice,  law  and  order. 
In  such  a  cause,  every  man,  loyal  and  true  to 
his  Government,  will  stand  by  him;  and  it 
ill  becomes  any  man,  especially  in  this  State, 
to  withhold  that  meed  of  praise  which  is  his 
due  for  the  services  rendered  to  the  Govern 
ment. 

The  case  is  now  submitted  to  this  Com 
mission  on  the  evidence  before  it;  and  I 
am  content  to  leave  it  in  your  hands,  after 
simply  quoting  the  opening  remarks  of  the 
counsel  who  last  addressed  you:  "In  ap 
proaching  the  evidence  in  the  case,  we  are 
almost  subdued  and  awed  into  silence  by 
considering  the  perilous  precipice  upon 
which  society,  especially  in  the  South-west, 
so  recently  hung,  if  the  testimony,  in  the 
plenitude  of  its  details,  or  even  in  its  gene 
ral  scope,  is  to  be  believed."  Inspecting 
that  testimony,  this  Commission  is  abund 
antly  able  to  j  udge.  If  this  testimony  is  to  be 
believed,  this  Government  was  on  the  brink 
of  a  precipice;  and  the  evidence  given  upon 
this  stand,  under  the  solemnity  of  an  oath, 
and  with  the  eye  of  Almighty  God  resting 
on  each  witness,  is  of  such  a  character  that 
no  argument  of  counsel,  or  finely  drawn  so 
phistries,  can  change  the  perilous  and  trea 
sonable  nature  of  the  circumstances  testi 
fied  to. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
at  3  o'clock,  P.  M.,  to  deliberate  on  the  find 
ing  and  sentence. 


FEBRUARY  26,  1866. 

It  is  not  thought  advisable  to  longer  de 
lay  the  publication  of  these  Treason  trials, 
for  the  final  action  of  the  President  in  the 
matter. 

When  the  findings  and  sentences  are  ap 
proved,  they  will  be  promulgated  in  General 
Orders,  and  will  then  be  generally  made 
known  by  means  of  the  daily  press. 


H 


h  DI2-I 


-V  100 


159 


SO? 


ilJVKUln    ifi)i>- 


^        II  JL  .      T  — 


PROCEEDINGS 


OP   A 


MILITARY  COMMISSION, 

Which  convened  at  Indianapolis,  Indiana,  by  virtue  of  the  following  Special  Orders, 

to  wit  : 


HEADQUARTERS  DISTRICT  OF  INDIANA,         1 
Indianapolis,  September  17,  1864.  j 

Special  Orders  No.  129. 

A  Military  Commission  is  constituted  to 
meet  at  the  United  States  Court  Rooms  in 
the  city  of  Indianapolis,  on  the  nineteenth 
(19th)  day  of  September,  1864,  at  10  o'clock, 
A.  M.,  or  as  soon  thereafter  as  practicable, 
for  the  trial  of  Harrison  H.  Dodd,  and  such 
other  prisoners  as  may  be  brought  before  it 

DETAIL   FOR   THE    COMMISSION. 

1.  Brevet  Brigadier  General  Silas  Colgrove, 
United  States  Volunteers. 

2.  Colonel  William  E.   McLean,  43d  In 
fantry,  Indiana  Volunteers. 

3.  Colonel  John  T.  Wilder,  17th  Infantry, 
Indiana  Volunteers. 

4.  Colonel   Thomas   I.    Lucas,    16th    In 
fantry,  Indiana  Volunteers. 

5.  Colonel  Charles   D.   Murray,  89th   In 
fantry,  Indiana  Volunteers. 

6.  Colonel   Benjamin    Spooner,    83d    In 
fantry,  Indiana  Volunteers. 

7.  Colonel   Richard  P.  DeHart,  128th  In 
fantry,  Indiana  Volunteers. 

Major  Henry  L.  Burnett,  Judge  Advocate 
Department  of  the  Ohio  and  Northern  De 
partment,  Judge  Advocate. 

The  Commission  will  sit  without  regard 
to  hours. 

By  order  of  Brevet  Major  General  Alvin 
P.  Hovey.  AND  C.  KEMPER, 

Assistant  Adjutant  General. 

Also  Special  Orders  appointing  as  mem 
bers  of  the  Commission : 

Colonel  Ambrose  A.  Stevens,  Veteran  Re 
serve  Corps. 

Colonel  Ansel  D.  Wass,  60th  Infantry, 
Massachusetts  Volunteers. 

Colonel  Thomas  W.  Bennett,  69th  In 
fantry,  Indiana  Volunteers. 

Colonel  Reuben  Williams,  12th  Infantry, 
Indiana  Volunteers. 

^  Colonel  Albert  Heash,  100th  Infantry,  In 
diana  Volunteers. 


Also  a  Special  Order,  authorizing  the 
Judge  Advocate  to  employ  an  additional 
phonographic  reporter. 


COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,        ) 
October  21,*  1864,  11  o'clock,  A.  M.  / 

The  Commission  met  in  compliance  with 
the  foregoing  Special  Orders,  and  pursuant 
to  adjournment. 

All  the  members  present  ;f  also  the 
Judge  Advocate. 

The  Commission  then  proceeded  to  the 
trial  of  William  A.  Bowles,  Andrew  Hum 
phreys,  Horace  Heff'ren,  Lambdin  P.  Milli- 
gan  and  Stephen  Horsey,  who  were  present 
before  the  Commission,  and  who,  having 
heard  read  the  orders  appointing  the  Com 
mission,  were  severally  asked  by  the  Judge 
Advocate  if  they  had  any  objection  to  any 
member  named  in  the  orders,  to  which 
William  A.  Bowles,  Andrew  Humphreys, 
Horace  Heffner  and  Stephen  Horsey  sever 
ally  replied :  "  I  have  none."  Lambdin  P. 
Milligan  replied,  "I  have  no  objection  to 
any  member  but  Colonel  Wass." 

Colonel  Wass  having  withdrawn  from  the 
court-room,  the  accused,  Lambdin  P.  Milli 
gan,  stated  his  objection  as  follows: 

"I  object  to  Colonel  Wass,  because  he  is 
from  a  locality  where  there  are  extreme 
prejudices  against  Western  men,  and  he  is 
likely  to  be  influenced  by  those  prejudices." 

The  Court  was  then  cleared  for  delibera 
tion.  J  On  being  reopened,  the  Judge  Advo- 


*  An  informal  meeting  was  held  on  the  19th,  pursuant 
to  adjournment,  but  the  case  not  being  ready  for  trial, 
the  Commission  adjourned  over  to  the  21st. 

•}•  If  a  member  of  the  Commission  was  absent  from 
sickness,  or  other  unavoidable  cause,  the  case  was  pro 
ceeded  with  only  on  the  consent  of  the  accused  being 
given  in  open  Court,  and  such  member  was  only  allowed 
to  again  take  his  seat  on  the  Commission  with  the  con 
sent  of  each  and  all  the  accused  being  given  in  open 
Court,  and  after  reading  the  testimony  taken  during  the 
absence  of  such  member. 

During  the  trial  of  these  treason  cases,  the  Commis 
sion,  instead  of  u  clearing  the  Court,"  as  is  the  custom  in 

73 


74 


TREASON    TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


cate  announced  to  the  accused,  Lambdin 
P.  Milligan,  that  his  objection  was  over 
ruled. 

Colonel  Ansel  D.  Wass  then  took  his  seat 
as  a  member  of  the  Commission. 

The  members  of  the  Commission  and  the 
Judge  Advocate  were  then  duly  sworn  in  the 
presence  *of  the  accused. 

Benn  Pitman  and  W.  S.  Bush  were  duly 
sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  as  recorders 
to  the  Commission,  also  in  the  presence  of 
the  accused. 

The  accused,  William  A.  Bowles,  requested 
permission  to  introduce  M.  M.  Kay  and  J. 
W.  Gordon,  Esqrs.,  as  his  counsel. 

The  accused,  Andrew  Humphreys,  re 
quested  permission  to  introduce  M.  M.  Hay, 
E.  A.  Davis,  Cyrus  L.  Dunham  and  J.  W. 
Gordon,  Esqrs.,  as  his  counsel. 

The  accused,  Horace  Heffren,  requested 
permission  to  introduce  Cyrus  L.  Dunham, 
E.  A.  Davis,  M.  M.  Ray  and  J.  W.  Gordon, 
Esqrs.,  as  his  counsel. 

The  accused,  Lambdin  P.  Milligan,  re 
quested  permission  to  introduce  John  R 
Coffroth,  Esq.,  as  his  counsel. 

The  accused,  Stephen  Horsey,  requested 
permission  to  introduce  John  Baker  and  C. 
L.  Dunham.  Esqrs.,  as  his  counsel. 

The  requests  of  the  accused  were  granted, 
and  their  counsel  appeared  in  Court. 

The  Judge  Advocate  stated  that  he  had 
consented,  by  agreement  with  the  counsel 
for  the  accused,  that  the  question  of  the  ju 
risdiction  of  the  Commission  should  be 
considered  at  the  close  of  the  case,  with  its 
full  force  and  effect  upon  the  Commission, 
as  though  it  were  taken  up  and  considered 
now.  It  was  also  agreed  between  the  Judge 
Advocate  and  the  counsel  for  the  accused, 
that  any  substantial  objection  to  the  charges 
and  specifications,  as  now  presented,  should 
be  considered  at  the  final  summing  up  of 
the  case. 

The  accused,  William  A.  Bowles,  Andrew 
Humphreys,  Horace  Heffren,  Lambdin  P. 
Milligan  and  Stephen  Horsey  were  then  ar 
raigned  on  the  following  charges  and  speci 
fications: 

CHARGES    AND  SPECIFICATIONS 

PREFERRED    AGAINST 

WILLIAM   A.    BOWLES,  ANDREW 
HUMPHREYS,    HORACE   HEF 
FREN,  LAMBDIN   P.   MIL 
LIGAN,  AND  STEPHEN 
HORSEY, 

OUbens  of  the  State  of  Indiana,   United  States  of  America. 

CHARGE  FIRST.— Conspiracy    against   the 
Government  of  the   United  States. 

SPECIFICATION  FIRST.— In  this,  that  the 
eaid  Wm.  A.  Bowles,  Andrew  Humphreys, 


military  court*,  retired  to  an  adjoining  room  for  delibe 
ration,  to  avoid  the  inconvenience  of  dismissing  the  audi 
ence  assembled  to  listen  to  the  proceedings. 


Horace  Heffren,  Lambdin  P.  Milligan,  and 
Stephen  Horsey,  did,  among  themselves, 
and  with  Harrison  H.  Dodd,  of  Indiana, 
Joshua  F.  Bullitt,  of  Kentucky,  J.  A.  Bar 
rett,  of  Missouri,  and  others,  conspire 
against  the  Government  and  duly  consti 
tuted  authorities  of  the  United  States,  and 
did  join  themselves  to,  and  secretly  organize 
and  disseminate,  a  secret,  unlawful  society 
or  order,  known  as  the  Order  of  American 
Knights,  or  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty, 
having  both  a  civil  and  military  organiza 
tion  and  jurisdiction,  for  the  purpose  of 
overthrowing  the  Government  and  duly 
constituted  authorities  of  the  United  States. 
This,  at  a  .period  of  war  and  armed  rebel 
lion  against  the  authority  of  the  United 
States,  at  or  near  Indianapolis,  Indiana,  a 
State  within  the  military  lines  of  the  Army 
of  the  United  States,  and  the  theater  of 
military  operations,  and  which  had  been, 
and  was  constantly  threatened  to  be,  in 
vaded  by  the  enemy.  This,  on  or  about  the 
16th  day  of  May,  1864. 
-  SPECIFICATION  SECOND. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Wm.  A.  Bowles,  Andrew  Humphreys, 
Horace  Heffren,  Lambdin  P.  Milligan,  and 
Stephen  Horsey,  during  an  existing  rebel 
lion  against  the  Government  and  authori 
ties  of  the  United  States — said  rebellion 
claiming  to  be  in  the  name  of,  and  on  be 
half  of  certain  States,  being  a  part  of  and 
owing  allegiance  to  the  United  States — did 
combine  and  agree  with  one  Harrison  H. 
Dodd,  of  Indiana,  Joshua  F.  Bullitt,  of  Ken 
tucky,  J.  A.  Barrett,  of  Missouri,  and 
others,  to  adopt  and  impart  to  others  the 
creed  or  ritual  of  a  secret,  unlawful  society 
or  order,  known  as  the  Order  of  American 
Knights,  or  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty, 
denying  the  authority  of  the  United  States 
to  coerce  to  submission  certain  rebellious 
citizens  of  said  United  States,  designing 
thereby  to  lessen  the  power  and  prevent  the 
increase  of  the  armies  of  the  United  States, 
and  thereby  did  recognize  and  sustain  the 
right  of  the  citizens  and  States,  then  in  re 
bellion,  to  disregard  and  resist  the  authority 
of  the  United  States.  This,  at  a  period 
of  war  and  armed  rebellion  against  the 
authority  of  the  United  States,  at  or 
near  the  city  of  Indianapolis,  Indiana,  a 
State  within  the  military  lines  of  the  Army 
of  the  United  States,  and  the  theater  of 
military  operations,  which  had  been,  and 
was  threatened  to  be,  invaded  by  the  en 
emy.  This,  on  or  about  the  22d  day  of  Feb 
ruary,  1864. 

SPECIFICATION  THIRD. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Wm.  A.  Bowles,  Andrew  Humphreys, 
Horace  Heffren,  Lambdin  P.  Milligan,  and 
Stephen  Horsey,  citizens  of  the  State  of 
Indiana,  owing  true  faith  and  allegiance  to 
the  Government  of  the  United  States,  and 
while  pretending  to  be  peaceable,  loyal  citi 
zens  of  the  Government,  did  secretly  and 
covertly  combine,  agree,  and  conspire, 


TREASON    TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


75 


among  themselves,  and  with  one  Harrison 
H.  Dodd,  of  Indiana,  Joshua  F.  Bullitt,  of 
Kentucky,  J.  A.  Barrett,  of  Missouri,  and 
others,  to  overthrow  and  render  powerless 
the  Government  of  the  United  States,  and 
did,  in  pursuance  of  said  combination, 
agreement  and  conspiracy,  form  and  organ 
ize  a  certain  unlawful,  secret  society  or 
order,  and  did  extend,  and  assist  in  extend 
ing,  said  unlawful  secret  society  or  order, 
known  as  the  Order  of  American  Knights, 
or  Order  of  Sons  of  Liberty,  whose  intent 
and  purpose  was  to  cripple  and  render 
powerless  the  efforts  of  the  Government  of 
the  United  States,  in  suppressing  a  then 
existing  formidable  rebellion  against  said 
Government.  This,  on  or  about  the  1st  day 
of  October,  1863,  at  a  period  of  war  and 
armed  rebellion,  at  or  near  the  city  of  In- 
dianapoWs,  Indiana,  a  State  within  the  mili 
tary  lines  of  the  Army  of  the  United 
States,  and  the  theater  of  military  op 
erations,  which  had  been,  and  was  con 
stantly  threatened  to  be,  invaded  by  the 
enemy. 

SPECIFICATION  FOURTH. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Wm.  A.  Bowles,  Andrew  Humphreys, 
Horace  Heft'ren,  Lambdin  P.  Milligan,  and 
Stephen  Horsey,  did  conspire  and  agree 
with  Harrison  II.  Dodd,  David  T.  Yeagle, 
John  C.  Walker,  and  Joshua  F.  Bullitt, 
and  others,  these  men  at  that  time  holding 
military  positions  and  rank  in  a  certain 
secret,  unlawful  society  or  organization, 
known  as  the  Order  of  American  Knights, 
or  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty,  to  seize  by 
force  the  United  States  and  State  Arsenals 
at  Indianapolis,  Indiana,  Columbus,  Ohio, 
and  Springfield,  Illinois,  to  release  by  force 
the  rebel  prisoners  held  by  the  authorities 
of  the  United  States,  at  Camp  Douglas,  Illi 
nois,  Camp  Morton,  Indiana,  and  Camp  Chase, 
Ohio,  and  the  Depot  of  Prisoners  of  War  on 
Johnson's  Island  ;  and  arm  those  prisoners 
with  the  arms  thus  seized,  and  that  then 
said  conspirators,  with  all  the  forces  they 
were  able  to  raise  in  the  secret  order 
above-named,  were,  in  conjunction  with  the 
rebel  prisoners  thus  released  and  armed,  to 
march  into  Kentucky  and  Missouri,  and 
co-operate  with  the  rebel  forces  to  be  sent 
to  those  States  by  the  rebel  authorities, 
against  the  Government  and  authorities  of 
the  United  States.  This,  on  or  about  the 
20th  day  of  July,  1864,  at  a  period  of  war 
and  rebellion  against  the  authority  of  the 
United  States,  at  or  near  the  city  of  Chi 
cago,  Illinois,  a  State  within  the  lines  of  the 
Army  of  the  United  States,  and  the  theater 
of  military  operations,  and  threatened  by 
invasion  of  the  enemy. 

Charge  Second. — Affording  aid  and  comfort  to 
Rebels  against  the  authority  of  the,  United 
States. 

.  SPECIFICATION  FIRST. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Wm.  A.  Bowles,  Andrew  Humphreys, 


Horace  Hefiren,  Lambdin  P.  Milligan,  and 
Stephen  Horsey,  being  then  members  of  a 
certain  secret,  unlawful  society,  or  order, 
known  as  the  Order  of  American  Knights, 
or  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty — the  United 
States  being  then  in  arms  to  suppress  a 
rebellion  in  certain  States  against  the  au 
thority  of  the  United  States — said  Wm.  A. 
Bowles,  Andrew  Humphreys,  Horace  II ef- 
fren,  Lambdin  P.  Milligan,  Stephen  Horsey, 
and  others,  then  and  there  acting  as  mem 
bers  and  officers  of  said  secret,  unlawful 
society  or  order,  did  design  and  plot  to 
communicate  with  the  enemies  of  the 
United  States,  and  did  communicate  with 
the  enemies  of  the  United  States,  with  the 
intent  that  they  should,  in  large  force,  in 
vade  the  territory  of  the  United  States, 
to-wit:  the  States  of  Kentucky,  Indiana,  and 
Illinois ;  with  the  further  intent,  that  the 
so-called  secret,  unlawful  society,  or  order, 
aforesaid,  should  then  and  there  co-operate 
with  the  said  armed  forces  of  the  said  re 
bellion  against  the  authority  of  the  United 
States,  and  did  communicate  to  said  armed 
forces  the  intent  and  purposes  of  said 
secret,  unlawful  society  or  order.  This,  at 
a  period  of  war  and  armed  rebellion  against 
the  authority  of  the  United  States,  at  or 
near  the  city  of  Indianapolis,  Indiana,  a 
State  writhin  the  military  lines  of  the  Army 
of  the  United  States,  and  the  theater  of 
military  operations,  which  had  been,  and 
was  constantly  threatened  to  be,  invaded 
by  the  enemies  of  the  United  States.  This, 
on  or  about  the  16th  day  of  May,  1864. 

SPECIFICATION  SECOND. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Wm.  A.  Bowles,  Andrew  Humphreys, 
Horace  Hefiren,  Lambdin  P.  Milligan,  and 
Stephen  Horsey,  while  the  Government 
was  attempting  by  force  of  arms  to  suppi  ess 
an  existing  rebellion,  while  guerrillas,  and 
other  armed  supporters  of  the  rebellion, 
were  in  the  State  of  Kentucky,  did  send 
a  messenger,  and  brother  member  with 
them  of  a  secret,  unlawful  society  or  order, 
known  as  the  Order  of  American  Knights, 
or  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty,  into  said 
State  of  Kentucky,  with  instructions  for 
Joshua  F.  Bullitt,  Grand  Commander  of  said 
secret,  unlawful  society  or  order,  in  said 
State,  and  other  members  of  said  secret 
society  or  order  in  said  State,  to  select  good 
couriers  or  runners,  to  go  upon  short  no 
tice,  and  for  the  purpose  of  assisting  those 
in  rebellion  against  the  United  States,  to 
call  to  arms  the  members  of  said  secret  so 
ciety  or  order,  and  other  sympathizers  with 
the  existing  rebellion,  whenever  a  signal 
should  be  given  by  the  authorities  of  said 
secret  society  or  order.  This,  on  or  about 
the  20th  day  of  July,  1864,  at  a  period  of 
war  and  armed  rebellion  against  the  author 
ity  of  the  United  States,  at  or  near  Indian 
apolis,  Indiana,  a  State  within  the  military 
lines  of  the  Army  of  the  United  States, 
and  the  theater  of  military  operations,  and 


76 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


which  had  been,  and  was  constantly  threat 
ened  to  be,  invaded  by  the  enemy. 

SPECIFICATION  THIRD. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Wm.  A.  Bowles,  Andrew  Humphreys, 
Horace  Heffren,  Lambdin  P.  Milligan,  and 
Stephen  Horsey,  being  citizens  of  the  State 
of  Indiana,  United  States  of  America,  and 
owing  true  allegiance  to  the  said  United 
States,  did  join  themselves  to  a  certain  un 
lawful,  secret  society  or  order,  Jcnown  as  the 
Order  of  American  Knights,  or  Order  of 
Sons  of  Liberty,  designed  for  the  overthrow 
of  the  Government  of  the  United  States. 
and  to  compel  terms  with  the  citizens  or 
authorities  of  the  so-called  Confederate 
States,  the  same  being  portions  of  the  United 
States,  and  in  rebellion  against  the  author 
ity  of  the  United  States,  and  did  communi 
cate  the  designs  and  intent  of  said  order  to 
those  in  rebellion  against  the  Government 
of  the  United  States.  This,  on  or  about 
the  20th  day  of  July,  1864,  at  a  period  of 
war  and  armed  rebellion  against  the  au 
thority  of  the  United  States,  at  or  near  In 
dianapolis,  Indiana,  a  State  within  the  mil 
itary  lines  of  the  Army  of  the  United  States, 
and  the  theater  of  military  operations,  and 
which  had  been,  and  was  constantly  threat 
ened  to  be,  invaded  by  the  enemy. 

CHARGE  THIRD.— Inciting  Insurrection. 

SPECIFICATION  FIRST. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Wm.  A.  Bowles,  Andrew  Humphreys, 
Horace  Heffren,  Lambdin  P.  Milligan,  and 
Stephen  Horsey,  did,  during  a  time  of  war  be 
tween  the  United  States  and  armed  enemies 
of  the  United  States,  and  of  rebellion  against 
its  Government,  organize  and  attempt  to 
arm,  and  did  arm,  a  portion  of  the  citizens  of 
the  United  States  through  an  unlawful,  se 
cret  society  or  order,  known  as  the  Order 
of  American  Knights,  or  Order  of  the  Sons 
of  Liberty,  with  the  intent  to  induce  them, 
with  themselves,  to  throw  off  the  authority 
of  the  United  States,  and  co-operate  with 
said  armed  enemies  of  the  United  States, 
against  the  legally  constituted  authorities 
of  the  United  States.  This,  on  or  about 
the  20th  day  of  July,  1864,  at  or  near  Indi 
anapolis,  Indiana,  a  State  within  tl>e  mili 
tary  lines  of  the  army  of  the  United  States, 
and  the  theater  of  military  operations,  and 
which  had  been,  and  was  constantly  threat 
ened  to  be,  invaded  by  the  enemy. 

SPECIFICATION  SECOND. — In  this,  that  the 
said  William  A.  Bowles,  Andrew  Hum 
phreys,  Horace  Heffren,  Lambdin  P.  Milli 
gan,  and  Stephen  Horsey,  did,  by  public- 
addresses,  by  secret  circulars  and  commu 
nications,  and  by  other  means,  endeavor 
to,  and  did  arouse  sentiments  of  hostility 
to  the  Government  of  the  United  States, 
and  did  attempt  to  induce  the  people  to  re 
volt  against  said  Government,  and  secretly 
organize  and  arm  themselves  for  the  pur 
pose  of  resisting  the  laws  of  the  United 


President  thereof.  This,  on  or  about  the 
16th  day  of  February,  1864,  at  a  period  of 
war  and  armed  rebellion  against  the  an 
thority  of  the  United  States,  at  or  near  In 
dianapolis,  Indiana,  a  State  within  the 
military  lines  of  the  army  of  the  United 
States,  and  the  theater  of  military  opera 
tions,  and  which  had  been,  and  was  con 
stantly  threatened  to  be,  invaded  by  the 
enemy. 

CHARGE  FOURTH.— Disloyal  Practice. 

SPECIFICATION  FIRST. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Wm.  A.  Bowles,  Andrew  Humphreys, 
Horace  Heffren,  Lambdin  P.  Milligan,  and 
Stephen  Horsey,  at  a  time  of  war,  and  dur- 
an  armed  rebellion  against  the  legally 
constituted  authorities  and  Government  of 
the  United  States,  did  counsel  and  advise 
citizens  of,  and  owing  allegiance  and  mili 
tary  service  to  the  United  States,  to  dis 
regard  the  authority  of  the  United  States, 
and  to  resist  a  call  or  draft,  designed  to  in 
crease  the  army  of  the  United  States,  and 
did  make  preparation,  and  attempt  to  arm, 
and  did  arm,  certain  citizens  of  the  United 
States,  belonging  to  a  certain  unlawful,  se 
cret  society  or  order,  known  as  the  Order 
of  American  Knights,  or  Order  of  the  Sons 
of  Liberty,  for  the  purpose  and  with  the 
intent  of  resisting  said  call  or  draft.  This, 
on  or  about  the  1st  day  of  July,  1864,  at  or 
near  Shoal's  Station,  Martin  county,  Indi 
ana,  a  State  within  the  military  lines  of  the 
army  of  the  United  States,  and  the  theater 
of  military  operations,  and  which  had  been, 
and  was  constantly  threatened  to  be,  in 
vaded  by  the  enemy. 

SPECIFICATION  SECOND. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Wm.  A.  Bowles,  Andrew  Humphreys, 
Horace  Heffren,  Lambdin  P.  Milligan,  and 
Stephen  Horsey,  at  a  time  of  war,  and  dur 
ing  an  armed  rebellion  against  the  legally 
constituted  authorities  and  Government  of 
the  United  States,  did  counsel  and  advise 
citizens  of,  and  owing  allegiance  and  mili 
tary  service  to  the  United  States,  to  disre 
gard  the  authority  of  the  United  States, 
and  to  resist  a  call  or  draft,  designed  to  in 
crease  the  army  of  the  United  States,  and 
did  make  preparation,  and  attempt  to  arm, 
and  did  arm,  certain  citizens  of  the  United 
States,  belonging  to  a  certain  unlawful,  se 
cret  society  or  order,  known  as  the  Order 
of  American  Knights,  or  Order  of  the  Sons 
of  Liberty,  for  the  purpose  and  with  the 
intent  of  resisting  said  call  or  draft.  This, 
on  or  about  the  1st  day  of  November,  1863, 
at  or  near  Green  Fork  township,  Randolph 
county,  Indiana,  a  State  within  the  mili 
tary  lines  of  the  army  of  the  United  States, 
and  the  theater  of  military  operations,  and 
which  had  been,  and  was  constantly  threat 
ened  to  be,  invaded  by  the  enemy. 


SPECIFICATION  THIRD. — In 


that   the 


said  Wm.   A.  Bowles,  Andrew    Humphreys, 
States,  and  the  orders  of  the  duly  elected    Horace  Heftren,  Lambdin  P.  Milligan  and 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


77 


Stephen  Horsey,  at  a  time  of  war,  and  dur-| 
ing  an  armed  rebellion  against  the  legally  j 
constituted  authorities  and  Government  of 
the  United  States,  did  counsel  and  advise 
citizens  of,  and  owing  allegiance  and  mili 
tary  service  to,  the  United  States,  to  dis 
regard  the  authority  of  the  United  States, 
and  to  resist  a  call  or  draft,  designed  to  in 
crease  the  army  of  the  United  States,  and 
did  make  preparation,  and  did  attempt  to 
arm,  and  did  arm,  certain  citizens  of  the 
jUnited  States,  belonging  to  a  certain  un- 
flawful  secret  society  or  order,  known  as  the 
[Order  of  American  Knights,  or  Order  of 
'Sons  of  Liberty,  for  the  purpose  and  with 
the  intent  of  resisting  said  call  or  draft. 
This,  on  or  about  the  16th  day  of  May,  1864, 
at  or  near  Indianapolis,  Indiana,  a  State 
within  the  military  lines  of  the  army  of 
the  United  States,  and  the  theater  of  mili 
tary  operations,  and  which  had  been,  and 
was  constantly  threatened  to  be,  invaded 
by  the  enemy. 

SPECIFICATION  FOURTH. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Wm.  A.  Bowles,  Andrew  Humphreys, 
Horace  Hefiren,  Lambclin  P.  Milligan,  and 
Stephen  Horsey,  at  a  time  of  war,  and  dur 
ing  an  armed  rebellion  against  the  legally 
constituted  authorities  and  Government  of 
the  United  States,  did  counsel  and  advise 
citizens  of,  and  owing  allegiance  and  mili 
tary  service  to,  the  United  States,  to  dis 
regard  the  authority  of  the  United  States, 
and  to  resist  a  call  or  draft,  designed  to  in 
crease  the  army  of  the  United  States,  and 
did  make  preparation  and  attempt  to  arm, 
and  did  arm,  certain  citizens  of  the  United 
States,  belonging  to  a  certain  unlawful  se 
cret  society  or  order,  known  as  the  Order 
of  American  Knights,  or  Order  of  the  Sons 
of  Liberty,  for  the  purpose  and  with  the 
intent  of  resisting  said  call  or  draft.  This, 
on  or  about  the  first  day  of  August,  1864, 
at  or  near  Salem,  Washington  county,  In 
diana,  a  State  within  the  military  lines  of  the 
army  of  the  United  States,  and  the  theater 
of  military  operations,  and  which  had  been, 
and  was  constantly  threatened  to  be,  in 
vaded  by  the  enemy. 

SPECIFICATION  FIFTH. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Wm.  A.  Bowles,  Andrew  Humphreys, 
Horace  Ileftren,  Lambdin  P.  Milligan,  and 
Stephen  Horsey,  did  accept  and  hold  offices 
of  the  military  forces  for  the  State  of  Indi 
ana,  in  a  certain  unlawful  secret  society, 
or  order,  known  as  the  Order  of  American 
Knights,  or  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty, 
which  said  offices  and  military  forces  were 
unknown  to  the  Constitution  and  laws  of 
the  United  States,  or  of  the  State  of  In 
diana,  and  were  not  in  aid  of,  but  opposed 
to,  the  legally  constituted  authorities  there 
of.  This,  on' or  about  the  16th  day  of  Feb 
ruary,  1864,  at  a  time  of  war  and  armed  re 
bellion  against  the  authority  of  the  Uni 
ted  States,  at  or  near  Indianapolis,  Indiana, 
a  State  within  the  military  lines  of  the 


army  of  the  United  States,  and  the  theater 
of  military  operations,  and  which  had  been, 
and  was  constantly  threatened  to  be,  in 
vaded  by  the  enemy. 

CHARGE   FIFTH.— Violation  of  the  Laws 
of  War. 

SPECIFICATION  FIRST. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Wm.  A.  Bowles,  Andrew  Humphreys, 
Horace  Heft'ren,  Lambdin  P.  Milligan,  and 
Stephen  Horsey,  did,  while  the  Govern 
ment  of  the  United  States  was  carrying  on 
war  with  the  enemies  of  the  United  States, 
engaged  in  rebellion  against  their  author 
ity,  while  pretending  to  be  peaceable,  loyal 
citizens  of  the  United  States,  violate  their 
allegiance,  and  did,  as  citizens  of  said  Gov 
ernment,  attempt  to  introduce  said  ene 
mies  of  the  United  States  into  the  loyal 
States  of  said  United  States,  thereby  to 
overthrow  and  destroy  the  authority  of  the 
United  States.  This,  on  or  about  the  16th 
day  of  May,  1864,  at  or  near  the  city  of 
Indianapolis,  Indiana,  a  State  within  the 
military  lines  of  the  army  of  the  United 
States,  and  the  theater  of  military  opera 
tions,  which  had  been,  and  was  constantly 
threatened  to  be,  invaded  by  the  enemy. 

SPECIFICATION  SECOND. — In  this,  that  the 
said  Wm.  A.  Bowles,  Andrew  Humphreys, 
Horace  Heffren,  Lambdin  P.  Milligan,  and 
Stephen  Horsey,  did,  during  a  war  between 
the  United  States  and  the  said  enemies  of 
the  United  States,  engaged  in  rebellion 
against  their  authority,  and  while  pretend 
ing  to  be  peaceable,  loyal  citizens  of  the 
United  States,  organize  and  extend  a  cer 
tain  unlawful,  secret  society  or  order, 
known  as  the  Order  of  American  Knights, 
or  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty,  having  for 
its  purpose  the  same  general  object  and 
design  as  the  said  enemies  of  the  United 
States,  and  with  the  intent  to  aid  and  in 
sure  the  success  of  said  enemies  in  their 
resistance  to  the  legally  constituted  au 
thorities  of  the  United  States.  This,  at  or 
near  the  city  of  Indianapolis.  Indiana,  on 
or  about  the  16th  day  of  May,  1864. 

HENRY  L/ BURNETT, 
Judge   Advocate   Department   of    the  Ohio   and 

Northern  Department. 

To  which  charges  and  specifications  the 
accused,  all  and  severally,  to  each  and  all 
the"  charges  and  specifications,  pleaded  NOT 
GUILTY. 

The  Judge  Advocate  then  asked  the  ac 
cused  if  they  were  ready  for  trial. 

J.  W.  Gordon,  counsel  for  the  accused, 
William  A.  Bowles,  Horace  Heffren,  and 
Andrew  Humphreys,  moved  for  a  separate 
trial  in  their  behalf,  and  submitted  the  fol 
lowing  reasons : 
Mr.  President  and  Gentlemen  of  the  Commission: 

Recognizing  the  law  which  governs  this 
Commission — as  the  common  law,  the  old 
English  common  law,  which  has  been  adopt- 


78 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


ed  by  every  State  in  the  Union — as  the  law  I  Lambdin  P.  Milligan,  one  of  the  accused, 
which  shall  influence  this  Commission  in  I  moved  in  his  own  behalf,  for  a  separate  trial, 
determining  how  these  defendants  shall  be  !  for  the  following  reasons : 
tried,  I  ask  you  to  favor  them  each  with  a  sep-  "It  is  exceedingly  inconvenient  for  me  to 
arate  trial.  All  the  States,  I  believe,  have  be  present  at  the  trial,  on  account  of  sick- 
enacted  statntes  on  this  subject.  Our  own  ness.  I  wish  as  short  a  trial  as  possible, 
State  has  enacted  a  statute  providing  for  I  and  the  evidence  introduced  against  others 
separate  trials  of  defendants  jointly  charged  !  may  protract  the  trial  to  great  length.  It 
with  criminal  offenses.  The  civil  courts  of  is  impossible,  I  am  advised  by  my  physi- 
the  United  States  generally  accord  to  the  I  cians,  to  be  in  any  position  but  a  recumbent 
defendant,  or  person  charged  with  an  one,  without  permanent  injury  to  my  limb, 
offense,  the  same  rule  of  practice  which)  If 'granted  a  separate  trial,  I  will  waive  all 
they  enjoy  as  a  right  in  their  State  courts,  j  technical  objections  in  the  progress  of  the 
But  we  do  not  ask  a  separate  trial  on  that!  case.  For  these  reasons,  I  ask  the  Commis- 
ground.  We  put  the  plea  on  the  discre-  sion  to  grant  me  a  separate  trial." 


tion  of  this  Court,  as  governed  by  the  com 
mon  law,  believing  that  these  defendants 
have  interests  that  can  not  be  subserved 
by  trying  them  together,  and  as  a  matter 
of  justice  I  ask  the  Court  for  their  sever 
ance  on  trial.  In  behalf  of  Horace  Hef- 
fren,  Andrew  Humphreys  and  William  A. 
Bowles,  for  whom  I  appear,  I  move  the 
Court  for  a  separate  trial  for  them. 

I  may  also  state  to  the  Court  a  fact  which 
will  be  apparent  on  the  trial  of  these 
causes.  Each  will  have  separate  witnesses, 


The  Judge  Advocate  replied : 
Gentlemen  of  the  Commission : 

An  application  has  been  presented  to  the 
Commission,  from  each  of  the  accused,  for 
a  separate  trial.  I  do  not  propose  person 
ally  to  object  to  those  applications.  I  only 
desire  to  put  before  the  minds  of  the  Court 
the  reasons  and  facts  that  present  them 
selves  to  my  mind  against  the  grant  of  the 


application. 

The  offenses  charged   against  these  de- 
and  will  pursue  a  different'  line  of  defense,  j  fendants  are  joint.     They  are  in  the  nature 


Each  has  his  own  character  to  defend.  The 
trial  going  on  as  one  trial  during  the  prose 
cution,  will  assume  in  the  defense  the  at 
titude  of  separate  trials,  and  the  defendants 
and  their  counsel  will  labor  under  great  in 
conveniences  and  difficulties  in  their  behalf. 
Another  point  I  make  is,  that  as  these 
men  are  all  charged  as  citizens  of  Indiana, 
they  are  entitled  as  such  to  separate  trials, 
as  there  are  no  rules  laid  down  for  the  reg 
ulation  of  these  trials,  and  one  might  put  in 


of  a  conspiracy.  Conspiracy  is  the  gist  of 
the  charges,  and  the  other  offenses  charged 
grew  out  of  this.  Once  having  established 
the  conspiracy,  the  acts  of  any  one  of  the 
conspirators  are  liable  to  be  brought  in 
proof  as  evidence  against  any  other  mem 
ber  of  the  conspiracy.  About  that  princi 
ple  of  law  there  can  be  no  question.  Not 
only  can  the  acts  of  any  member  of  a  com 
mon  conspiracy  be  brought  as  proof  against 
other  co-conspirators,  but  also  their  admis- 


a  plea  on  that  ground.  We  trust  the  motion  sions,  their  letters,  their  writings,  and  the 
fora  separate  trial  for  the  defendants  to  |  records  they  leave  behind  them.  In  that 
the  discretion  of  the  Commission,  as  a  I  case,  the  proof  on  the  part  of  the  Govern- 
matter  of  justice  to  the  accused.  ment  will  be  no  more  complicated  in  the 

Cyrus  L.  Dunham,  counsel  for  Stephen  matter  of  proof  against  the  accused  in  a  joint 
Horsey,  one  of  the  accused,  moved  for  a  i  trial  than  if  separate  trials  were  granted, 
separate  trial  for  the  accused,  for  the  follow- 1  The  proof  against  one  is  proof  against  all 
ing  reasons :  j  the  accused.  That  being  the  case,  we  may 

It  is.  in  my  opinion,  entirely  without  pre- !  prove  against  Milligan  the  acts  of  Dodd, 
cedent  in  Military  Courts,  to  put  two  pris-iand  the  testimony  introduced  by  Milligan 
oners  on  trial  at  the  same  time.  Defend-  that  he  did  not  do  these  acts  himself,  con- 


ants,  jointly  charged,  are  entitled  to  all  the 
benefits  they  can  derive  from  separate  trials. 


statutes  no    defense    for    him.     When   he 
takes   upon  himself  the  responsibility   of 


In  a  joint  trial,  the  evidence  introduced  j  joining  an  unlawful  body,  he  takes  upon 
against  one  defendant  might  militate  |  himself  the  responsibility  for  every  unlaw- 
against  another,  and  bear  more  strongly  j  ful  act  of  that  body.  The  law  also  holds 
against  him  than  if  he  was  tried  separately,  i  that  when  men  combine  together  for  such 
The  prosecution,  he  presumed,  would,  in  its  (purposes,  having  greater  power  for  evil 
evidence,  follow  the  line  pursued  in  the 'through  such  an  organization,  they  shall 
Dodd  trial,  proving  one  act  of  one  party' be  held  to  a  greater  accountability.  There 
by  one  witness,  and  separate  acts  of  other  j  is  also  a  greater  latitude  given  in  proof 
parties  by  other  witnesses.  The  defense  [  against  conspirators  than  against  any  other 
would  branch  out  into  separate  lines,  ac-  class  of  criminals  known  to  the  law.  That 
cording  to  the  side  issues  presented.  The!  being  the  case,  the  argument  for  a  separate 
evidence  might  not  bear  as  strongly  against!  defense  has  but  little  weight.  Even  if  it 
one  defendant  as  against  the  other"  and  i  is  important  that  each  man  should  put  his 
this  might  confuse  the  Commission  when  it!  character  in  issue  and  prove  his  good  char- 
comes  to  a  final  decision.  :  acter,  he  can  do  that  as  well  when  on  trial 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


79 


jointly  as  singly.  You,  gentlemen  of  the 
Commission,  make  up  your  verdict  against 
each  one  of  these  defendants  separately. 
If  you  find  that  any  one  of  these  men  has 
been  misled,  you  may  take  into  considera 
tion  the  absence  of  evil  intent  in  joining 
this  organization,  as  well  in  a  joint  trial  as 
in  separate  trials.  There  is  no  argument 
the  accused  can  Advance  against  joint  trials 
which  will  show  that  they  are  deprived  of 
any  rights  and  privileges  which  would  ac 
crue  from  separate  trials.  They  can  not, 
and  do  not  claim  that  under  the  common 
law  they  may  sever  these  prisoners  and  in 
troduce  them  as  witnesses,  one  in  favor  of 
the  other.  They  know  that  they  can  not 
do  that.  No  benefit  in  that  respect  would 
accrue  to  them  from  a  separate  trial. 

The  question  submitted  to  the  Court  is  a 
matter  of  policy  simply,  and  in  respect  to 
that,  there  are  two  important  considera 
tions.  There  are  the  rights  and  privileges 
of  the  accused  to  be  considered,  and  also 
the  rights  and  privileges  of  the  Govern 
ment."  One  should  be  weighed  and  bal 
anced  against  the  other.  I  would  say  to 
the  Commission,  give  to  the  defendants 
the  greatest  possible  latitude  consistent 
with  the  interests  of  the  Government, 
where  no  rights  will  be  waived.  I  will 
grant  them  every  thing  that  involves  mere 
form  and  courtesy.  1  will  go  further  to 
issue  processes  to  bring  in  witnesses  for 
the  accused  than  I  would  for  the  Govern 
ment.  But  while  granting  all  possible  lati 
tude  to  the  accused,  I  can  not  forget  that 
there  comes  up  a  strong  plea  from  unnum 
bered  thousands  who  have  an  interest  in 
the  results  of  this  Commission. 

There  are  sitting  around  me  officers, 
none  under  the  rank  of  Colonel;  one  who 
presides  over  the  Commission,  with  the 
rank  of  Brevet  Brigadier  General.  Each 
of  you  is  entitled  to  command  a  regiment 
of  one  thousand  men ;  and  some,  if  not  all  of 
you,  were  in  command  of  brigades  in  the 
lield,  numbering  from  one  to  three  thou 
sand  men.  You  are  the  representatives 
of  fifteen  thousand  men  at  least,  who,  un 
der  your  leadership,  would  do  gallant  ser 
vice  for  your  country.  You,  gentlemen  of 
the  Commission,  are  needed  in  the  field, 
and  whether  you  shall  consume  unneces 
sary  time  by  protracting  these  trials,  is  a 
matter  of  importance  to  the  Government, 
and  to  the  untold  millions  who  look  forward 
with  interest  and  hope  to  the  future  for  the 
success  of  its  armies. 

There  is  also  another  consideration  of 
some  importance  to  the  Government.  You 
sit  on  this  Commission  at  a  great  cost  to 
the  Government,  for  the  pay  of  members, 
of  witnesses,  and  other  expenses.  That  is 
a  point  to  be  considered  in  determining  the 
motion  for  separate  trials.  If  no  rights  of 
the  accused  are  to  be  prejudiced  by  a  joint 
trial,  the  question  :ri  economy  becomes  an 


important  argument  in  favor  of  proceeding 
Avith  the  trial  of  the  prisoners  as  arraigned. 

I  would  also  add,  that  if  any  single  right 
of  any  one  of  the  accused  would  be  preju 
diced  by  a  joint  trial,  I  would  not  urge  it. 
I  have  looked  at  this  matter  in  all  its  lights, 
and  can  not  see  that,  individually,  they  will 
be  prejudicial  in  a  single  right  which  they 
would  have  if  separate  trials  were  accorded 
them. 

As  Judge  Advocate  of  this  Department,  I 
have  vast  rights,  duties  and  responsibilities. 
My  detention  here  will  result  in  holding 
hundreds  of  persons  now  in  prison,  charged 
with  military  offenses,  who  are  waiting  their 
trials.  I  have  to  organize  Courts  for  their 
trials,  to  prefer  the  charges  against  them,  and 
exercise  a  general  supervision  over  the  pro 
ceedings  of  these  courts.  There  are  other 
men  besides  the  prisoners  now  in  Court, 
who  are  asking  of  the  Government  a  speedy 
hearing.  They  have  rights  at  stake  as  well 
as  the  accused  here.  While,  therefore,  I  ask 
of  you  no  one  thing  which  can  do  the  accused 
any  wrong,  or  which  will  limit  them  in 
bringing  every  fact,  which  will  accrue  to  their 
benefit,  before  this  Commission,  while  I 
would  grant  them  every  possible  courtesy, 
I  must  ask  the  Commission  to  use  its  discre 
tion  so  wisely,  that  it  shall  not  wrong  others, 
or  the  Government. 

One  of  the  counsel  for  the  accused  states 
that  he  has  examined  military  books,  and 
has  not  found  a  single,  case  where  prisoners 
have  been  jointly  arraigned  before  a  military 
court.  I  will  state  that  in  my  military  ex 
perience,  and  as  Judge  Advocate,  I  have  not 
seen  a  single  case  that  did  not  make  pre 
cedents.  This  war  has  been  constantly  ma 
king  precedents.  The  army  of  the  United 
States  has  exceeded  in  magnitude,  during 
this  war,  any  thing  conceived  by  the  found 
ers  of  this  Government.  The  army  has  pro 
gressed  in  all  respects  further  in  two  years 
than  it  would  have  done  in  two  centuries  at 
its  former  rate  of  existence.  This  fact  has 
given  rise  to  new  conditions.  We  do  not 
act  entirely  in  accordance  with  the  common 
law,  as  recognized  two  centuries  ago,  but 
settle  its  principles,  as  applied  to  military 
offenses,  and  make  precedents,  in  every  case 
which  we  try  in  military  courts.  We  make 
precedents  in  the  government  of  the  army, 
and  in  the  military  courts.  All  that  the 
accused  have  a  right  to  ask  here  is,  that  this 
Commission  violate  no  law,  and  do  them 
exact  justice.  I,  therefore,  submit  to  you 
for  decision  the  application  for  a  severance 
of  the  defendants. 

The  court-room  was  then  cleared  for  the 
purpose  of  deliberation  on  the  application 
of  the  accused. 

On  the  re-opening  of  the  court-room,  the 
Judge  Advocate  announced  that  the  Com 
mission  proposed  to  hold  the  application  of 
the  accused  under  advisement  until  2£ 
o'clock,  P.  M. 


80 


TREASON   TRIALS  AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
at  half  past  2  o'clock  P.  M. 

AFTERNOON    SESSION. 

COCRT  KOOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,        \ 
October  21,  1864.  2%  o'clock,  P.  M.  j 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  ad 
journment. 

All  the  members  present.  Also,  the 
Judge  \  Advocate,  the  accused  and  their 
counsel. 

The  court-room  was  then  cleared  for  de 
liberation  on  the  question  of  granting  the 
accused  a  separate  trial. 

On  the  re-opening  of  the  Court,  the  Judge 
Advocate  announced  to  the  accused  that 
the  Commission,  after  a  full  and  careful  de 
liberation  of  the  question,  had  concluded 
that  in  view  of  the  fact,  that  no  right  or 
rights  of  any  of  the  accused,  in  any  particular, 
would  be  prejudiced  by  a  joint  trial,  it  was 
their  duty  to  proceed  with  the  trial  of  the 
prisoners  as  they  were  arraigned. 

William  M.  Harrison,  a  witness  for  the 
Government,  was  then  introduced,  and 


bein< 

testif 


duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate, 
ed  as  follows: 


Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate :  Please 
give  to  the  Court  your  name  and  residence? 

Answer.  William  M.  Harrison;  I  reside 
in  this  city. 

Q.  State  your  business  for  the  last  year 
or  two? 

A.  I  have  been  in  no  particular  business 
for  the  last  year.  I  was  traveling  and  col 
lecting  for  George  W.  Howes  a  portion  of  the 
time  during  last  year. 

Q.  Have  you  had  any  other  employ  for 
which  you  received  pay  and  compensation  ? 

A.  I  was  employed  as  Grand  Secretary  of 
the  Grand  Council  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty  in 
the  State  of  Indiana,  at  a  salary  of  $800  per 
annum.  I  became  a  member  of  the  Grand 
Council,  on  or  about  the  27th  of  August, 
1863,  and  became  Grand  Secretary  of  the 
Grand  Council  on  or  about  the  10th  of  Sep 
tember,  1863. 

Q.  When  and  where  did  you  first  have 
any  knowledge  of  the  Order  of  American 
Knights,  or  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty, 
or  Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle? 

A.  The  first  knowledge  I  ever  had  of  the 
Order  of  American  Knights  was  at  Terre 
Haute,  on  or  about  the  27th  of  August, 
1863.  I  received  a  letter  from  H.  II.  Dodd 
at  Terre  Haute,  requesting  me  to  go  there; 
when  there  I  was  invited  to  attend  a  meet 
ing  that  night.  I  did  so ;  there  were  but 
twelve  or  fifteen  present. 

Q.  Whom  did  you  meet  there? 

A.  Among  those  I  recollect  were  P.  C. 
Wright,  and  a  person  by  the  name  of  D.  R 
Eckles,  John  E.  Risley,  Callum  Bayley  and 
John  G.  Davis.  Most  of  them  were  strang 
ers  to  me. 

Q.  What  was  done  at  that  meeting? 

A.  Mr.  Wright  appeared  to  have  charge 


of  the  meeting.  He  stated  that  it  was 
called  for  the  purpose  of  organizing  a  secret 
society.  He  proceeded  to  initiate  members, 
and,  after  that,  to  organize  the  Grand  Coun 
cil  of  the  State  of  Indiana.  Those  who  were 
initiated,  were  initiated  in  the  three  degrees 
at  the  same  time. 

Q.  Were  you  initiated  in  the  three  de 
grees  at  that  time? 
A.  I  was. 

Q.  Who  were  elected  officers? 
A.  D.  R.  Eckles  was  elected  Temporary 
Grand  Commander;  H.  H.  Dodd,  Temporary 
Deputy  Grand  Commander ;  John  E.  Risley, 
Temporary    Grand    Secretary,    and    I   was 
elected  Temporary  Assistant  Secretary. 
Q.  Where  was  the  next  meeting  held? 
A.  In  this  city,  about  the  10th  of  Septem 
ber  following,  at  the    Military   Hall,  over 
Talbot   &  Co.'s  jewelry  store.      It  was  an 
adjourned  meeting  of  the  Grand  Council 
that  had  met  at  Terre  Haute.     It  convened 
about  9  or  10  in  the  morning  of,  I  think, 
the  10th  of  September.      They  adjourned 
at  noon,  and  met  again  at  2  o'clock. 
Q.  What  business  did  they  transact? 
A.  In   the  morning,  those  persons  who 
were  delegates  from  various  counties,  who 
had  not  been  initiated  into  the  Order,  were 
initiated  by  Mr.  Wright. 
Q.  Who  was  President  ? 
A.  Mr.  Dodd,  both  in  the  forenoon  and 
afternoon.     Mr.  Wright  initiated  members 
present  who  had  never  received  degrees ; 
after  he  got  through  initiating  those,  he  ini 
tiated  the  members  present  in  the  Grand 
Council  Degree,  and  declared  the  Council 
open  for  business.     I  was  initiated  in  that 
degree. 

Q.  In  what  did  it  differ  from  others? 
A.  Simply  in  the  sign  of  recognition  and 
colloquy. 

Q.   Who  were  initiated  that  day  ? 
A.  David  T.  Yeakle  and  Dr.  Bowles.     The 
great  majority  of  the  members  were  initiated 
on  that  day. 

Q.  Were  any  other  citizens,  now  present 
in  this  court  room,  initiated  that  day,  that 
you  remember  ? 
A.  No.  sir. 

Q.  Was  any  other  business  done  besides 
the  initiation  of  members  ? 

A.  After  the  members  had  been  initiated 
in  the  Grand  Council  Degree,  Mr.  Wright 
declared  the  Council  ready  for  business,  and 
proceeded  to  the  election  of  officers,  which 
resulted  in  the  election  of  II.  II.  Dodd  as 
rand  Commander,  and  David  T.  Yeakle. 
Deputy  Grand  Commander.  I  was  elected 
Grand  Secretary.  We  immediately  pro 
ceeded  to  other  business.  A  committee, 
under  the  name  of  a  military  committee, 
was  appointed  to  draft  a  military  bill.  Mr. 
Dodd  was  a  member,  and  Yeakle  and 
Bowles.  I  think  there  were  one  or  two 
others,  but  I  do  not  remember  their  names. 
Q.  Was  any  military  bill  drafted  by  them? 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


81 


A.  It  was  the  subject  of  discussion  in  the 
afternoon. 

Q.  What  became  of  it  ? 

A.  It  was  in  my  possession,  and  I  des 
troyed  it. 

Q.  When? 

A.  I  destroyed  all  the  papers  belonging 
to  the  organization  after  the  exposition  in 
the  Indianapolis  Journal. 

Q.  Give  the  Court  the  features  of  that 
bill,  as  near  as  you  can  recollect. 

A.  It  provided  for  the  division  of  the 
State  into  four  districts;  the  National  Road 
divided  the  north  and  south  parts  of  the 
State.  The  names  of  the  districts  were  the 
North-eastern,  North-western,  South-eastern 
and  South-western.  The  counties  in  these 
districts  were  divided  as  nearly  equal  as 
could  be.  It  also  went  into  detail  to  pro 
vide  for  the  organization  of  the  whole  mili 
tary  force,  the  number  and  size  of  the  regi 
ments  to  be  raised,  duties  of  officers,  etc. 

Q.  What  was  to  be  the  size  of  the  regi 
ments  ? 

A.  They  were  to  consist  of  nine  compa 
nies  of  infantry,  one  company  of  rifles,  and 
one  section  of  artillery.  The  bill  provided 
lor  the  election  of  major  generals;  and 
they  spoke  of  providing  that  major  gener 
als  should  appoint  brigadiers,  the  brigadiers 
appoint  colonels,  colonels  appoint  the  cap 
tains,  and  captains  the  subordinate  offi 
cers. 

Q.  Were  any  major  generals  appointed  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  David  T.  Yeakle  and  Andrew 
Humphreys  were  appointed  under  that  bill; 
Mr.  Milligan,  and  Mr.  Conklin,  living  of  this 
city.  These  four  were  all. 

Q.  Was  Milligan  appointed  one  of  the 
major  generals? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  know  him? 

A.  I  see  him  there. 

The  witness  here  pointed  to  the  accused, 
Lambdin  P.  Milligan. 

Q.  Is  that  the  Milligan  you  have  refer 
ence  to? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  see  any  others  present  in  the 
court  room  who  were  appointed  major  gen 
erals  ? 

A.  Dr.  Bowles  I  see  present,  and  Mr. 
Humphreys. 

The  witness  here  pointed  to  the  accused, 
Win.  A.  Bowles  and  Andrew  Humphreys. 

Q.  Is  that  the  Dr.  Bowles  who  was  pres 
ent  at  that  meeting? 

A.   It  is. 

Q,  Is  that  the  Andrew  Humphreys  who  i 
was  appointed  major  general? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Were  any  other  appointments  made  j 
then  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Were  any  of  those  appointments  made 
outside  of  the  membership  of  the  order? 

A,  My  understanding  of  the  matter  was, 
6 


that  appointments  were  made  among  mem 
bers  of  the  order  only. 

Q.  Were  any  speeches  made  at  that 
meeting? 

A.  Dr.  Bowles  spoke  at  considerable 
length,  but  I  do  not  remember  the  matter 
of  his  remarks,  except  that  they  were  on 
the  features  of  the  military  bill.  Dr.  Yea 
kle  spoke  on  the  same  subject. 

Q.  State  whether  or  not,  at  that  meeting, 
he  urged  the  arming  of  the  members  of  the 
order. 

A.  As  far  as  I  recollect,  I  can  not  say. 

Q.  To  what  time  did  it  adjourn  ? 

A.  To  meet  during  the  month  of  Novem 
ber  following. 

Q.  State  if  it  met,  and  if  so,  who  pre 
sided. 

A.  It  did,  at  the  former  place  of  meeting. 
Harrison  II.  Dodd  presided,  and  I  acted  as 
secretary. 

Q.  Who  were  present  ? 

A.  Mr.  Milligan  and  J.  J.  Bingham,  and 
delegates  were  present  from  some  thirty 
counties. 

Q.  Were  any  others  present  at  that  meet 
ing  that  you  now  see  in  this  court  room  ? 

A.  1  do  not  think  there  were.  Neither 
Stephen  Horsey,  Andrew  Humphreys,  nor 
Horace  Heftren  was  present.  Dr.  Bowles 
was  present. 

Q.  Was  L.  P.  Milligan  present? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  State  what  was  done  at  that  meeting. 

A.  There  was  not  much  business  trans 
acted.  A  committee  was  appointed  to  get 
up  a  prospectus  of  a  newspaper,  to  advocate 
the  distinctive  principle  of  the  order.  That 
was  discussed  at  considerable  length.  There 
was  some  discussion  in  regard  to  the  exten 
sion  of  the  Democratic  party.  The  exten 
sion  of  the  order  in  the  various  counties 
was  particularly  talked  of.  Discussion  on  ed 
ucation  also  took  place  at  that  meeting. 
No  speeches  were  made  at  that  meeting,  as 
far  as  I  can  recollect;  they  did  not  go  be 
yond  an  organization  for  political  purposes. 

Q.  What  was  said  at  that  meeting  about 
the  object  of  the  military  organization  ? 

A.  Nothing  was  said  about  it,  except  that 
it  was  necessary  to  organize  in  a  military 
capacity,  to  protect  the  rights  of  the  mem 
bers  against  the  encroachments  of  the  Ad 
ministration. 

Q.  WJ^ere  was  the  next  meeting  ? 

A.  It  was  held  in  this  city,  on  the  16th  or 
17th  of  February,  1864. 

Q.  Were  there  present  any  of  the  per 
sons  now  in  the  court  room,  as  far  as  you 
remember  ? 

A.  Mr.  Heffren,  Mr.  Milligan  and  Mr. 
Bowles  were  present.  Mr.  Humphreys  and 
Mr.  Horsey  were  not  present.  I  can  not 
say  positively  whether  Mr.  Milligan  was 
present  or  not ;  he  was  absent  from  one 
meeting,  and  I  think  it  was  that  one.  Heft 
ren  and  Bowles  made  speeches. 


82 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


Q.  What  was  the  general  object  of  this 
meeting  of  the  16th  or  17th  ? 

A.  It'was  the  regular  annual  meeting  of 
the  organization.  It  had  been  said  that  the 
anniversary  of  the  order  was  the  22cl  of 
February.  It  was  called  in  advance  of  the 
meeting  of  the  Supreme  Council  to  be  held 
in  New  York  on  the  22d.  to  enable  dele 
gates  to  attend  that  meeting.  At  that 
meeting  an  election  of  officers  took  place. 

Q.  Who  were  elected? 

A.  H.  H.  Dodd,  Grand  Commander,  Hor 
ace  Ileftren,  Deputy  Grand  Commander, 
and  myself  Grand  Secretary. 

Q.  Was  there  any  voting  in  regard  to  ma 
jor  generals  ? 

A.  The  election  of  major  generals  took 
place  at  the  same  meeting.  Humphreys 
was  elected  in  his  district,  Milligan  in  his 
district,  and  Bowles  was  elected  in  the 
south-west  district.  Walker  was  elected  in 
the  north-western  district. 

Q.  Did  Yeakle  or  others  resign? 
.    A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  How  did  they  get  out  of  office  ? 

A.  All  officers  were  to  be  elected  yearly. 
The  first  elections  were  made  until  the  22d 
day  of  February.  As  this  was  the  annual 
meeting,  a  new  election  was  held,  that  re 
sulted  as  I  have  just  stated. 

Q.  Who  were  the  delegates  to  the  New 
York  meeting? 

A.  Several  delegates  were  elected  by  the 
Grand  Council  at  the  New  York  meeting. 
I  can  not  say  positively  who  were  elected 
in  February. 

Q.  Can  you  state  some  of  the  delegates 
to  the  various  meetings  in  September  and 
November? 

A.  At  the  meeting  in  September,  John  GK 
Davis  and  D.  R  Eckles  were  elected  dele 
gates  to  the  Council  in  Chicago,  in  Septem 
ber,  1863,  and  I  think  Humphreys  also. 

Q.  To  what  Council? 

A.  The  Supreme  Council.  Milligan  was 
elected  delegate  to  the  Supreme  Council. 
Dodd  was  elected  to  the  Supreme  Council 
by  virtue  of  his  office. 

How  many  attended  ? 

A.  I  understood  Dodd  that  Milligan  was 
present  at  the  meeting  of  the  Supreme 
Council  at  Chicago  or  New  York,  and  Hum 
phreys  was  present  either  at  the  Chicago 
or  New  York  meeting,  I  do  not  recollect 
which.  Dr.  Bowles  was  present  at  one  or 
both  places.  The  first  meeting  was  held 
in  Chicago,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  month 
of  September,  1863. 

Q.  Was  Dodd  at  that  meeting? 

A.  He  left  to  attend  it ;  I  understood  he 
was  there  himself.  I  understood  also  that 
Humphreys  was  present  at  that  meeting, 
and  Yeakle  and  Dr.  Bowles.  I  got  this  in 
formation  from  Dodd. 

Q.  Have  you  no  means  of  telling  whether 
Milligan  was  present  at  that  meeting  ? 

A.  None  but  the  information   I  derived 


from   Dodd.     I   have  no  means  of  saying 
positively. 

Q.  Was  any  written  address  read  at  the 
meeting  of  February  16th  and  17th? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  an  address  was  read  by  Mr. 
Dodd,  which  was  subsequently  printed  and 
circulated  among  the  members  of  the 
order. 

Q.  How? 

A.  An  order  was  passed  that  the  address 
of  the  Grand  Commander  and  such  portion 
of  the  proceedings  of  the  State  Council  as 
was  necessary  should  be  printed. 

Q.  What  was  that'? 

A.  That  the  address  of  the  Grand  Com 
mander,  the  report  of  the  Grand  Secretary, 
and  the  report  of  the  Finance  Committee, 
should  be  printed.  After  the  meeting  ad 
journed,  it  was  printed  in  pamphlet  form; 
and  I  sent  two  copies  to  each  branch  Tem 
ple  in  the  State. 

Q.  Did  you  send  to  any  of  the  lodges 
where  Mr.  Milligan  lives? 

A.  I  sent  them  to  Huntington  county, 
directing  them  to  Mr.  Milligan. 

Q.  Did  you  send  any  to  Mr.  Humphreys' 
county  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  directing  them  to  Mr.  Hum 
phreys  ? 

Q.  How  many  did  you  send? 

A.  Two  of  the  addresses  to  each  one. 

Q    Did  you  send  any  to  Dr.  Bowles? 

A.  I  think  I  did ;  1  generally  sent  two  to 
each  county. 

Q.  Did  you  send  any  to  Mr.  Heffren  ? 

A.  I  can  not  say  positively  whether  I  sent 
any  to  lleftren  or  not. 

Q,  Is  that  one  of  the  pamphlets  you  have 
spoken  of? 

[A  pamphlet  entitled  "  Proceedings  of  the 
Grand  Council  of  the  State  of  Indiana," 
was  here  handed  to  the  witness  by  the 
Judge  Advocate.] 

A.  It  is. 

Q.  What  does  that  pamphlet  contain  ? 

A.  It  contains  an  address  delivered  by 
Dodd,  and  proceedings  of  the  State  Council, 
and  the  reports  of  committees. 

Q.  Was  this  pamphlet  sent  out  to  the 
counties  in  which  the  order  existed? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

[The  pamphlet  entitled  "Proceedings  of 
the  Grand  Council  of  the  State  of  Indiana," 
was  here  put  in  evidence  by  the  Judge 
Advocate.  See  Appendix.] 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Saturday,  October  22,  1864,  at  10  o'clock, 
A.  M 


COURT  BOOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         > 
October  22,  1864,  10  A.  M.  J 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  ad 
journment. 

All  the  members  present.  Also,  the 
Judge  Advocate,  the  acetified,  and  their 
counsel 


TREASON    TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


83 


The  proceedings  were  read  and  ap 
proved. 

The  accused,  Andrew  Humphreys,  then 
made  the  following  application  to  the  Com 
mission: 

"I  respectfully  request  that  E.  H.  C. 
Oavins,  Esq.,  and  William  Mack,  Esq.,  may 
be  admitted  to  act  as  counsel  for  me  upon 
the  trial  of  this  cause. 

[Signed.]  ANDREW  HUMPHREYS, 

"For  himself." 

Which  application  was  granted,  and  the 
counsel  appeared  for  the  accused. 

The  testimony  of  Wm.  M.  Harrison,  a 
witness  for  the  Government,  was  then  con 
tinued  as  follows: 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate: 

State  what  the  circular  now  handed  you 
is? 

Answer.  This  circular  is  one  I  sent  out  to 
the  various  County  Temples,  with  a  copy  of 
the  Constitution  and  By-Laws  for  the 
County  and  Branch  Temples.  The  circu 
lar  was  read  to  the  Court  by  the  Judge  Ad 
vocate.  Said  circular  introduced  in  evi 
dence.* 

Q.  Did  you,  or  did  you  not,  inclose  one 
of  these  circulars  with  all  the  addresses 
you  sent  to  the  different  County  Temples? 

A.  With  that  circular  I  sent  out  a  copy 
of  the  Constitution  of  the  Grand  Council, 
and  one  or  two  copies  of  the  proceedings  of 
the  meeting  held  here  on  the  16th  and  17th 
days  of  February. 

Q.  For  what  purpose  was  this  assessment 
referred  to  made? 

A.  For  defraying  the  expenses  of  the 
Grand  Council. 

Q.  What  was  the  nature  of  those  ex 
penses? 

A.  Payment  for  printing,  the  salary  of 
the  Secretary,  and  the  payment  of  the  assess- 


Mr. 


^OFFICE  GRAND  SECRETARY,  S.  L.,        / 
Indianapolis, ,  1864.  { 


DEAR  SIR:  Inclosed  please  find  the  Constitution  for 
the  government  of  County  and  Branch  Temples,  the 
Constitution  for  the  government  of  the  Grand  Council, 
and  a  portion  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Grand  Council  at 
their  meeting  held  on  the  16th  and  17th  days  of  Febru 
ary,  1864. 

You  will  find,  on  reference  to  the  Report  of  the  Finance 
Committee,  that  the  Grand  Council  has  assessed  a  tax  of 
twenty  cents  on  each  member  of  the  organization  through 
out  the  State,  to  be  paid  on  or  before  the  first  Monday 
in  May  next.  It  is  also  required  that  each  and  every 
Comity  Temple  in  the  State  send  the  Grand  Secretary 
full  reports  of  the  number  of  their  membership,  names 
of  their  officers,  and  the  number  of  branches  organized 
on  the  first  day  of  May  and  each  three  months  thereafter. 
Prompt  attention  to  the  above  is  urgently  requested. 

The  assessment  of  $20. 00  on  each  county,  in  addition  to 
the  twenty  cents  for  each  member,  is  still  in  force,  as  far 
as  those  counties  are  concerned  that  have  not  paid  that 
assessment. 

You  will  please  present  the  papers  to  your  County 
Temple  immediately,  and  see  that  the  above  require 
ments  are  promptly  carried  out. 

By  the  authority  of  the  Supreme  Council  of  the 
United  States,  there  have  been  some  material  changes 
made  in  the  Ritual,  etc.  You  will  please  send  an  accred 
ited  member  of  your  Temple  here,  as  soon  as  possible,  for 
instruction  ;  and  with  him  you  can  send  the  amount 
due  from  your  counta,  as  the  money  is  absolutely  neces 
sary,  and  must  be  forthcoming. 


ment  of  the  Supreme  Council,  as  well  as  for 
the  payment  of  rent  and  other  expenses. 

Q.  Were  any  members  of  the  different 
County  Temples  sent  in  pursuance  of  the 
last  clause  of  this  circular? 

A.  Members  were  sent  with  respect  to 
the  change  in  the  Ritual  of  the  organiza 
tion.  The  obligations  and  the  lessons  and 
a  portion  of  the  passwords  and  colloquies 
had  been  changed. 

Q.  Was  there  any  change  in  the  name  of 
order  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  the  name  of  the  order  had 
been  changed  to  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of 
Liberty. 

Q.  When  and  by  what  authority  was  that 
change  made? 

A.  It  was  made  at  the  meeting  of  the  Su 
preme  Council.  I  was  informed  by  Dodd 
that  the  change  was  made  by  the  authority 
of  the  Supreme  Council  on  the  22d  day  of 
February. 

Q.  Do  your  records  show  any  change  in 
the  name- of  the  order? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  never  made  any  record  of 
the  change  in  the  proceedings  of  the  meet 
ings. 

Q.  From  whom  did  you  first  receive  infor 
mation  of  the  change? 

A.  From  Dodd. 

Q.  What  position  did  he  occupy  ? 

A.  That  of  Grand  Commander  of  the  State 
of  Indiana. 

Q.  How  soon  after  the  22d  day  of  Febru 
ary  did  you  learn  of  this  change? 

A.  Immediately  after  the  arrival  of  Dodd 
here ;  but  1  can  not  state  positively.  It  was 
within  two  or  three  weeks  after  the  22d  of 
February. 

Q.  Was  that  change  made  known  to  the 
subordinate  lodges  throughout  the  State? 
If  so,  how? 

A.  It  was  made  known  by  means  of  the 
circular  just  read,  and  through  the  agents 
sent  out  to  give  information. 

Q.  Did  any  messengers  come  up  from  Mr. 
Milligan's  district? 

A.  I  believe  there  were  some  from  his 
'ongressional  District.  I  have  no  recollec 
tion  of  any  messengers  coming  up  from  his 
county.  There  were  a  number  of  counties 
n  that  Congressional  District  that  were  or 
ganized  in  this  society. 

Q,  Was  any  person  sent  up  from  Mr. 
Humphreys'  district  or  county  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  but  persons  came  up  from 
Sullivan  county  to  obtain  instructions,  and 
I  believe  persons  also  came  up  from  "Vigo 
county  for  instructions. 

Q.  You  may  state  what  these  changes 
were. 

A.  A  change  was  made  in  the  name  of 
the  organization ;  a  change  was  also  made 
in  the  colloquies  of  the  order,  in  the  obli 
gations,  and  also  in  the  lessons. 

A  pamphlet  was  here  handed  to  the  wit 
ness. 


84 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


Q.  Please  to  examine  and  state  what 
that  pamphlet  is? 

A.  That  was  the  ritual  of  the  Order  of 
American  Knights;  the  vestibule  lesson 
and  the  first  degree  of  the  Order  of  Amer 
ican  Knights. 

Q.  Does  this  contain  the  obligation  that 
was  required  to  be  taken  by  every  membei 
of  the  Order  of  American  Knights? 

A.  I  believe  it  does,  sir.  The  obligation 
of  the  first  degree  also  required  in  the  ves 
tibule. 

A  pamphlet  entitled  V.'  was  here  offeree 
in  evidence  by  the  Judge  Advocate. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  objected  to  its 
introduction,  and  proposed  to  ask  the  wit 
ness  some  questions  respecting  the  authen 
ticity  of  the  pamphlet,  to  which  the  Judge 
Advocate  objected ;  the  counsel  for  the  ac 
cused  replied : 

May  it  please  the  Court:  As  I  discover 
now  that  many  of  these  documents  are  to 
be  introduced,  it  is  important  that  we 
should  settle  the  course  to  be  pursued  as  to 
their  introduction,  and,  therefore,  I  desire 
to  submit  the  question  now. 

It  is  not  sufficient  for  the  Judge  Advo 
cate,  in  my  judgment,  to  offer  such  a  doc 
ument  as  this  to  the  witness,  and  the 
witness,  after  glancing  over  it,  to  say  that  it 
is  the  ritual,  without  being  asked  how  or 
where  he  knew  it  to  be  such,  and  by  what 
authority  it  was  promulgated.  Before  the 
document  is  introduced  as  evidence,  the 
witness  should  be  passed  over  to  the  other 
side,  and  we  should  be  at  liberty  to  cross- 
examine  him  with  respect  to  this  isolated 
fact,  of  where  this  document  comes  from, 
how  he  knows  it,  and  how  he  knows  it  was 
promulgated  by  competent  authority.  How 
does  he  know  that  it  was  received  and  act 
ed  upon.  In  all  courts  of  justice,  before 
a  document  can  be  offered  in  evidence,  all 
these  distinct  facts  as  to  its  identity  are 
gone  into  and  proved.  And  when  a  docu 
ment  has  once  gone  into  evidence,  we  can 
not  object  to  it.  If  it  goes  in  evidence  on 
insufficient  identity,  how  are  we  to  rem 
edy  it? 

It  may  be  said,  that  if,  after  the  docu 
ment  has  once  gone  in  evidence,  we  show, 
on  cross-examination,  that  it  is  not  prop 
erly  authenticated,  the  Commission  would 
reject  it,  or  give  no  weight  to  it.  That 
might  be  true  with  this  Commission,  but 
we  ought  to  have  the  rules  of  law  and  cross- 
examination  applied  here.  We  all  know 
that  if  we  were  trying  a  case  of  this  kind 
before  a  jury,  that  the  evidence,  after  once 
getting  before  the  jurors,  would  have  its 
influence,  though  it  were  testimony  that 
ought  not  to  have  been  introduced. 

I  submit,  that  before  the  document  can 
be  submitted  to  this  Commission,  we  ought 
to  have  the  privilege  of  cross-examination, 
confined  strictly  to  the  document,  its  au 
thenticity,  and  the  propriety  of  its  admis- 


sibility  to  the  Commission  as  evidence.  I 
do  not  know  that  this  is  a  matter  of  very 
much  importance,  but  it  is  one  which  we 
may  as  well  settle  at  once,  that  we  may 
know  how  we  are  to  be  governed  here 
after. 

The  Judge  Advocate  replied  : 
It  has  already  been  proved  before  this 
Commission,  that  the  witness  on  the  standr 
Mr.  Harrison,  is  Grand  Secretary  of  a  so 
ciety  or  order,  known  at  present  as  the 
Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty.  That  that 
order  was  changed  from  the  Order  of  Amer 
ican  Knights.  Mr.  Harrison  stated  that  he 
belonged  to  that  order ;  that  he  assisted  at 
the  inauguration  of  the  order,  and  was  one 
of  its  first  members  in  this  city,  and  that 
he  has  been  its  Grand  Secretary  from  that 
time  to  this.  I  hand  him  this  paper,  and 
ask  him  what  it  is.  After  a  careful  exam 
ination,  he  answers,  that  it  is  a  ritual  of 
the  Vestibule  and  First  Degree,  and  obli 
gation  of  the  First  Degree  of  the  Order  of 
American  Knights.  I  then  propose  to  in 
troduce  this  paper  before  the  Commission 
as  evidence  ;  before  that  they  know  nothing 
of  its  contents. 

I  differ  from  the  counsel.  His  right,  un 
der  the  common  law,  is  to  object  that  the 
paper  has  not  been  sufficiently  proved. 
The  question  then  arises,  has  it  been  so 
brought  before  this  Commission  as  to  make 
it  material,  and  been  sufficiently  connected 
with  the  matters  in  issue  to  make  it  im 
portant  that  this  Commission  should  call 
that  paper  before  them  for  their  examina 
tion  ?  I  do  distinctly  say  that  the  coun 
sel  for  the  accused  can  not  stop  my  ex 
amination,  nor  have  the  power  to  cross-ex 
amine  the  witness  before  I  turn  him  over 
to  them  for  that  purpose.  He  can  object 
that  I  have  not  sufficiently  laid  the  foun 
dation  of  any  question,  or  for  any  paper 
which  I  propose  to  place  before  the  Com 
mission  and  they  pass  upon  that  objection  ; 
but  he  can  not  ask  at  my  hands  that  I 
shall  turn  that  witness  over  to  him,  until 
I  am  through  with  him,  and  I  do  not  pro 
pose  to  do  it  until  the  Commission  or 
ders  it. 

The  objection,  as  I  take  it,  is  to  my  mode 
of  examination,  and  I  insist  on  the  intro 
duction  of  the  paper,  because  I  consider 
:he  foundation  has  been  sufficiently  laid. 
If  the  objection  is  not  insisted  on,  there  is 
no  question  before  the  court. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  replied: 

I  interpose  the  objection  that  the  paper 
should  not  be  received  in  evidence   until 
we  have  the  power  at  some  time — I  do  not 
are  whether  it  is  now  or  after  the  Judge 
Advocate  has  closed  his  examination,  as  to 
he  paper — to  test  by  a  cross-examination 
he   authenticity  of   that  document.     The 
members   of  this   Commission   know,  that 
at  least  in  this  State,  when  a  note  is  intro 
duced  into  court,  before  that  note  shall  be 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


85 


offered  in  evidence,  the  counsel  on  the 
other  side  are  permitted  to  examine  the 
witness  as  to  its  identity  and  authenticity, 
but  not  as  to  its  contents.  And  not  until 
that  identity  and  authenticity  have  been  test 
ed  and  proved,  is  the  document  introduced. 

The  court  was  then  closed  for  delibera 
tion  upon  the  objection  of  the  accused,  as 
fco  whether  the  pamphlet  should  be  re 
ceived  in  evidence,  before  the  counsel  for 
the  accused  have  an  opportunity  to  cross- 
examine  the  witness  upon  it 

On  the  re-opening  of  the  court,  the  Judge 
Advocate  announced  that  the  objection 
was  overruled,  and  the  pamphlet  was  re 
ceived  in  evidence.  [See  Appendix.] 

Q.  State  what  that  is,  commencing  on 
page  5? 

A.  That  is  the  obligation  of  the  Neophyte 
in  the  First  Degree.  The  Neophyte  lesson 
was  the  first  in  the  Order  of  American 
Knights,  and  given  in  the  Vestibule. 

Q.  Wherein  do  they  differ,  if  at  all  ? 

A.  A  person  elected  to  become  a  member 
of  the  Neophyte  organization,  received  that 
lesson  and  no  other;  he  never  attended 
any  of  the  meetings  of  the  Order  of  Amer 
ican  Knights;  he  was  simply  taken  into  the 
Vestibule,  received  the  obligation,  and  was 
discharged. 

Q.  What  was  the  status  of  a  person 
taking  the  Neophyte  degree? 

A.  All  persons  becoming  members  of  the 
organization  were  obliged  to  take  the  Neo 
phyte  degree,  as  the  preliminary ;  and  those 
considered  only  worthy  to  take  the  first 
degree  were  taken,  and  the  oath  adminis 
tered  without  their  having  any  knowledge 
of  any  further  degrees. 

Q.  State  whether  or  not  the  change  in 
this  order  released  the  members  from  the 
obligations  they  had  taken  in  the  Ameri 
can  Knights? 

A.  My  understanding  was,  that  when  the 
change  was  made,  the  members  were  re 
leased  from  the  obligations  of  the  Ameri 
can  Knights,  and  took  those  of  the  Sons  of 
Liberty. 

Q.  Were  there  any  cases  in  which  no 
changes  were  made  in  the  order,  or  in  the 
change  of  name  ? 

A.  We  endeavored  to  make  the  changes 
as  perfect  as  possible.  Each  of  the  counties 
was  organized  under  the  Order  of  Ameri 
can  Knights,  and  I  can  not  say  positively 
that  there  were  any  counties  in  which  the 
change  wras  not  made,  though  there  may 
have  been  some  that  did  not  send  up  dele 
gates. 

Q.  Did  the  Supreme  Commander  of  the 
Sons  of  Liberty  exercise  control  over  the 
American  Knights  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  it  is  my  opinion  that  he  did. 

Q.  Upon  what  do  you  base  that  opinion  ? 

A.  The  difference  between  the  Order  of 
American  Knights  and  Sons  of  Liberty  was 
tkis,  that  when  the  ritual  and  obligations 


were  changed,  it  was  not  necessary  for  the 
American  Knights  to  take  the  obligations 
of  the  Sons  of  Liberty,  but  simply  to  as 
sume  them.  It  was  the  same  organization 
with  a  different  name,  and  different  ritual 
ind  colloquies,  as  I  understood  it. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  thing  being  done 
by  the  Supreme  Commander  of  the  Sons 
of  Liberty,  as  to  exercising  control  over 
the  American  Knights? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  the  present  Su 
preme  Commander  was  ever  in  the  Ameri 
can  Knights? 

Q.  Who  is  that  ? 

A.  Vallandigham.   The  Grand  Command 
er  of  this  State  was  Grand  Commander  of 
the  Order  of  American  Knights,  and  exer- 
ised  the  same  powers  over  the  Sons  of  Lib 
erty. 

Q.  After  the  change,  did  he  exercise  the 
same  control  as  before  ? 

A.  It  was  considered  the  same  organiza 
tion. 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say  that  it  was 
not'necessaiy  to  take  the  obligation  of  the 
Sons  of  Liberty,  but  to  assume  it  What  do 
you  mean  by  that?  • 

A.  The  persons  taking  the  obligation  of 
the  Order  of  American  Knights  were  not 
required  to  re-obligate  themselves,  and 
take  the  obligation  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty; 
it  was  understood  that  they  assumed  the 
obligation,  and  no  requirement  was  made 
or  carried  into  force.  None  of  those  who 
took  the  obligation  of  the  Order  of  Ameri 
can  Knights  took  the  obligation  of  the  Sons 
of  Liberty. 

Q.  I  understood  you  that  those  who  went 
into  the  Sons  of  Liberty  were  released  from 
the  obligation  of  the  Order  of  American 
Knights — how  do  you  explain  it  ? 

A.  I  understood  that  they  were  released 
so  far  as  the  change  was  concerned.  The 
obligation  had  been  changed,  and  it  wat> 
understood  that  they  assumed  the  new  obli 
gation. 

Q.  If  they  took  any  new  obligation,  were 
they  or  were  they  not  released  from  the  ob 
ligation? 

A.  I  never  perfectly  understood  whether 
they  were  or  not. 

Q.  Were  they  held  to  the  old  obligation, 
supposing  they  took  no  new  obligation? 

A.  They  were  supposed  to  be  held  to  the 
obligation  they  had  taken. 

[Certain  pamphlets  were  handed  to  the 
witness.] 

Q.  State  if  you  know  what  those  are?  11 
so,  state  what  they  are? 

A.  This  book  (entitled  "S.  L.")  I  know  to 
be  the  ritual  of  the  first  degree,  containing 
the  first  lesson  of  the  Order  of  Sons  of 
Liberty.  This  (entitled  "General  Laws  of 
the  S.  L.")  is  the  Constitution  of  the  County 
Temple  of  the  State.  This  (entitled  ''Con 
stitution  of  the  Grand  Council,"  etc.,)  is  (lie 
Constitution  of  the  Grand  Council  of  tLis 


86 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


State  for  the  Sons  of  Liberty.  This  (entitled 
"I")  is  the  ritual  of  the  First  Conclave  de 
gree,  or  second  degree  of  the  Order  of  Sons 
of  Liberty,  and  also  the  Second  Conclave  or 
third  degree  of  the  Order  of  Sons  of  Lib 
erty. 

Q.  Who  were  required  to  take  the  obliga 
tions  contained  in  these  Rituals? 

A.  All  persons  who  became  members  of 
those  degrees.  Those  who  had  become 
members  of  the  Order  of  American  Knights 
(of  the  second  and  third  degree)  simply 
assumed  the  obligations  of  the  new  order. 

The  above-named  Rituals  were  here  put 
in  evidence  on  the  part  of  the  Court.  [See  I 
Appendix.] 

Q.  I  understand  you  to  say  that  this  new 
order  of  things  was  brought  about  after  the 
return  of  the  Grand  Commander  from  New 
York.  Am  I  correct? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  it  was  after  his  return  from 
Xc\v  York,  but  1  can  not  say  positively' how 
long  after. 

Q.  When  was  the  next  meeting  after  that 
of  the  16th  and  17th  of  February?  and 
where? 

'  A.  The  next  meeting  of  the  Grand  Coun 
cil  of  this  State  was  on  the  14th  of  June, 
1864,  at  the  Hall  of  Marion  Temple. 

Q.  How  many  counties  of  the  State  were 
represented  at  that  meeting? 

A.  About  thirty  counties. 

Q.  How  many  delegates  to  a  county? 

A.  Some  counties  had  one,  some  two,  and 
some  more  than  two. 

Q.  How  many  delegates  were  present  at 
the  meeting? 

A.  I  should  judge  about  forty  members. 

Q.  Who  presided  at  that  meeting? 

A.  The  Grand  Commander,  Mr.  Dodd. 

Q.  Who  was  Secretary  ? 

A.  I  was. 

Q.  Who,  if  any  of  the  accused,  were 
present  at  that  meeting? 

A.  Mr.  Bowles,  Mr.  Humphreys,  Mr.  Mil- 
ligan  and  Mr.  Horsey  were  present  at  that 
meeting.  A  gentleman  by  the  name  of 
Stephen  Horsey  was  present,  but  I  do  not 
know  whether  he  (the  accused)  is  the  man 
or  not;  I  do  not  recognize  him ;  at  all  events 
he  was  a  delegate  from  Martin  county. 

Q.  Did  any  initiations  take  place  at  that 
time? 

A.  Those  members  who  were  present  who 
hr.d  not  received  theCouncil  Degree, received 
it  at  that  meeting,  but  I  do  not  recollect 
who  took  it. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  whether  a  Mr.  La- 
salle  was  present  at  that  meeting? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  WThere  is  Lasalle  from? 

A.  From  Cass  county.  I  do  not  know  his 
name,  but  I  think  it  is  Charles. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  any  persons  of  this 
city  who  were  initiated  ? 

A.  There  were  no  persons  from  this  city 
initiated. 


Q.  Commence  at  the  convening  of  the 
Council  and  give  to  the  Commission,  as 
nearly  as  you  can,  what  took  place  in  de 
tail;  how  and  by  whom  it  was  opened,  how 
you  gained  admittance,  and  what  was  done? 

A.  The  Grand  Council  convened  about 
10  o'clock  on  the  morning  of  the  14th  of 
June,  and  was  in  session  till  5  or  6  in  the 
evening.  I  remember  that  I  was  very  late  at 
the  meeting.  It  was  delayed  on  account  of 
my  absence.  It  was  convened  by  the  Grand 
Commander,  who  delivered  a  short  verbal 
address  at  the  opening  of  the  meeting.  1 
have  no  recollection  as  to  what  was  said  in 
the  address.  The  next  business  in  order 
was  conferring  the  Grand  Council  Degreo 
upon  those  members  that  had  not  received 
them. 

Q.  Was  the  Grand  Council  Degree  supe 
rior  to  the  Third  Degree? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Who  was  entitled  to  receive  that  de 
gree? 

A.  Those  persons  who  were  present  who 
had  not  received  it  before. 

Q.  Did  any  member  receive  that  degree  ? 

A.  No  person  was  given  that  degree  un 
less  he  was  elected  as  a  delegate  to  the  State 
Council ;  every  delegate  to  the  State  Coun 
cil  was  bound  to  receive  that  degree  before 
he  could  act  as  a  member  of  the  Council. 

Q.  What  was  done  after  the  speech? 

A.  There  was  general  business  transacted; 
the  most  important,  I  think,  was  the  appoint 
ment  of  a  committee  of  thirteen,  whose 
duty  it  was  to  act  in  the  interim  of  the 
meeting  of  the  State  Council,  and  to  exer 
cise  the  same  power  that  the  State  Council 
had. 

Q.  Who  was  appointed  on  that  committee? 

A.  I  can  not  say;  it  was  a  secret  commit 
tee;  the  appointing  power  was  placed  in  the 
hands  of  the  Grand  Commander,  Dodd,  who 
was  supposed  to  be,  ex  njficlo,  a  member  of 
that  committee,  and  had  the  appointing  of 
them.  It  was  intended  to  be  a  secret  com 
mittee,  that  should  not  be  known,  even  to 
the  members  themselves,  until  they  were 
called  together. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  or  not  they 
were  called  together? 

A.  I  do  not. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  address  being  is 
sued  by  them? 

A.  I  have  no  knowledge  of  any,  save  a 
printed  one,  that  I  have  seen  since  I  have 
been  in  prison;  but  I  knew  nothing  about 
it  before. 

Q.  What  was  done  after  the  appointment 
of  the  committee  of  thirteen? 

A.  After  discussions  on  political  mattersy 
there  was  a  resolution  to  appoint  a  com 
mittee  of  five  to  proceed  to  Hamilton,  Ohio, 
on  the  next  day,  the  15th.*  That  resolution 
afterward  was  amended,  by  authorizing  all 


*Tho  occasion  of  Mr.  Vallandigbam's  return  to  Ohio. 


TREASON    TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


87 


the  members  to  consider  themselves  mem 
bers  of  that  committee.  A  resolution  was 
also  brought  up  with  respect  to  Govern 
ment  detectives  becoming  members  of  the 
organization.  It  was  understood  that  some 
Government  detectives  had  become  initia 
ted  as  members  of  the  organization,  and 
a  discussion  took  place,  to  find  whether  it 
wan  the  case  or  not. 

Q.  Was  any  one  named  ? 

A.  A  man  by  the  name  of  Coffin  was  said 
to  belong,  and  there  was  a  general  discus 
sion  in  reference  to  the  looseness  of  the 
manner  in  which  the  initiations  were  car 
ried  on,  and  an  appeal  made  to  the  mem 
bers  to  be  more  particular  in  future. 

Q,  Was  any  thing  said  as  to  what  was  to 
be  done  in  the  matter  ? 

A.  Nothing  within  my  recollection  or 
knowledge  came  before  the  meeting  in  a 
business  capacity. 

Q.  Did  any  thing  come  before  the  meet 
ing  in  an  unofficial  capacity  ?  or  did  you 
learn  what  was  to  be  done  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  did  not;  but  I  heard  Mr. 
Dodd  remark  that  a  person  who  came  into 
the  organization  as  a  Government  detective 
ought  to  be  made  away  with  ;  it  was  a  re 
mark  made  in  private  conversation,  and 
was  not  brought  before  the  meeting  offi 
cially. 

Q.  WTas  that  remark  made  during  the 
meeting? 

A.  It  was  during  the  meeting  that  I  heard 
it. 

Q,  What  other  business  was  done  at  that 
meeting  ? 

A.  1  can  not  recollect  any  other  particu 
lar  business,  save  that  there  were  resolu 
tions  passed  in  reference  to  the  increase  of 
the  organization.  I  looked  upon  it  at  the 
time  as  an  unimportant  meeting.  There 
was  no  important  business  transacted. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  or  not  any  per 
son  did  go  to  Hamilton  ? 

A.  Not  of  my  own  knowledge. 

Q.  Were  any  other  officers  or  men  ap 
pointed?  or  any  other  formal  business  done 
at  the  meeting  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  the  officers  for  the  present 
year  had  all  been  appointed  at  the  meet 
ing  in  February. 

Q.  How  was  that  meeting  adjourned? 

A.  Sine  die. 

Q.  'Was  the  June  meeting  a  regular  meet 
ing  of  the  Council? 

A.  It  was  a  called  meeting,  called  by  the 
Grand  Commander,  through  printed  no 
tices  issued  by  me,  and  sent  by  mail.  He 
requested  me  to  issue  notices  to  the  various 
County  Temples,  calling  a  meeting  on  the 
14th  of  June.  That  was  the  last  meeting 
of  the  Grand  Council  held  that  I  attended, 
and  I  believe  there  has  been  no  other 
meeting  of  the  Grand  Council  held  since 
that  time,  either  here,  or  in  any  portion  of 
the  State. 


Q.  Do  you  remember  what  the  strength 
of  the  order  was  computed  to  be  at  the 
meeting  in  June  ? 

A.  At  the  meeting  in  February  I  received 
reports  from  seventeen  counties,  who  re 
ported  the  strength  within  their  limits  at 
something  over  five  thousand  members. 
There  were  some  seventeen  to  twenty  othe'r 
counties  that  made  no  reports.  1  computed 
their  number  at  twelve  thousand.  From 
the  reports  made  in  June,  there  was  an  in 
crease  in  the  organization  of  about  twenty 
per  cent.,  making  it  about  fifteen  thousand. 

Q.  WThat  did  you  compute  it  to  be  in 
September,  from  the  best  data  you  had  at 
that  time  ? 

A.  Taking  the  ratio  of  increase  from  Feb 
ruary  to  June,  I  should  not  have  put  the 
organization  to  exceed  eighteen  thousand 
members. 

Q.  In  this  number  do  you  include  the 
Order  of  American  Knights,  and  Sons  of 
Liberty,  all  who  had  taken  any  of  the  de 
grees'? 

A.  I  mean  that  it  includes  the  members 
of  first,  second  and  third  degree,  members 
of  the  organization,  but  it  would  not  in 
clude  the  members  of  the  Vestibule,  sim 
ply  because  there  was  no  report  made  of 
those  members,  they  were  not  considered 
members  of  the  organization.  As  a  gen 
eral  thing,  the  Vestibule  members  were  very 
few. 

Q.  You  may  name  the  counties  in  which 
this  organization  existed  as  far  as  you  can  ? 

A.  I  can  not  name  all  of  them.  The  or 
ganization,  so  far  as  I  have  received  reports, 
existed  in  the  counties  of  Marion,  Marshall, 
Allen,  Huntington,  Laporte,  Fulton,  Cassf 
Harrison,  Washington,  Orange,  Grant,  Madi 
son,  Crawford,  Posey,  Vanclerburg,  and  War- 
rick.  The  reports  received  were  from  forty- 
five  counties  in  all. 

Q.  Did  this  order  exist  in  Randolph 
county,  to  your  knowledge? 

A.  1  never  received  any  report  of  the  es 
tablishment  of  any  County  Temple.  There 
may  have  been  branch  Temples;  but  the 
order  existed  to  no  extent  in  that  county  ? 

Q.  Plow  about  Dearborn  county  ? 

A.  So  far  as  I  can  recollect,  there  was  no 
organization  in  that  county. 

Q.  Was  Randolph  county  represented  in 
any  of  these  meetings  by  delegates  ? 

A.  1  think  not,  sir ;  but  I  will  not  state 
positively. 

Q.   Was  Cass  county  represented  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  by  Mr.  Lasalle. 

Q.  Was  Howard  county  represented  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  know  any  thing  of  the  strength 
of  the  organization  in  adjoining  States  ? 

A.  Nothing  positive.  I  understood  that 
the  order  was  better  organized  in  Illinois 
than  in  any  other  State  in  the  Union.  But 
I  had  no  information  that  was  official. 

Q.  State  to  the  Commission  whether  any 


88 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


stops  were  taken,  to  your  knowledge,  and 
if  so  how  far,  for  the  arming  or  drilling  of 
the  organization? 

A.  There  was,  to  my  knowledge,  no  reso 
lution  passed  at  the  meeting  of 'the  State 
Council  to  arm  this  organization,  or  looking 
to  the  arming  or  purchase  of  arms,  or  to 
the  drilling  of  the  organization. 

Q.  I  ask  you  what,  to  your  knowledge, 
was  done? 

A.   I  have  no  knowledge  of  the  arming  or 

drilling  of  the  members  of  the  organization. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  attempt  to  arm 

the  organization? 

A.  I  do  not  know  any  thing  at  all  about 
arms,  except  those  that  were  seized  here 
last  August. 

Q.  What  was  done  or  said  in  an  official 
way,  looking  to  the  drilling  and  arming  of 
the  organization,  and  any  acts  of  the  leaders. 
A.  I  have  no  knowledge  of  the  purchase 
of  any  arms,  or  any  attempt  to  arm  the 
organization,  or  of  the  organization  or  any 
portion  of  it  being  under  drill. 

Q.  What  do  you  know  about  the  arms 
seized  here  ? 

A.  I  had  no  knowledge  of  the  purchase  or 
the  shipment  of  these  arms  until  about  four 
or  five  days  previous  to  their  arrival.  Mr. 
Walker  came  to  my  house  one  night,  be 
tween  9  and  10  o'clock.  He  asked  me  if 
I  knew  whether  Mr.  Dodd  had  informed 
Parsons  that  there  would  be  some  boxes 
coming  here  addressed  to  him.  I  told  Him 
I  did  not.  He  then  said  that  he  should 
like  me  to  say  to  Parsons  that  there  would 
be  some  boxes  arriving  in  a  day  or  two, 
which  he  would  like  him  to  take  in  and 
take  care  of  until  he  returned.  I  can  not 
say  whether  Walker  stated  at  that  inter 
view  that  these  boxes  contained  arms  or 
not.  I  went  down  the  next  morning  and 
asked  Parsons  if  Dodd  had  informed  him 
that  these  boxes  were  coming.  He  said 
that  he  had,  and  that  he  had  received  the 
information.  I  left  the  city  on  that  day, 
and  was  absent  three  or  four  clays.  The 
morning  after  my  return  to  the  city,  I  went 
down  to  Dodd's  office,  and  I  saw  on  the 
sidewalk  five  or  six  boxes  addressed  "  J.  J. 
Parsons,  Indianapolis,  Ind."  Parsons  was 
engaged  in  getting  those  boxes  into  the 
building.  I  asked  him  if  these  were  the 
boxes  spoken  of,  and  he  said  they  were. 
The  boxes  were  taken  up  to  the  second 
floor,  and  put  in  a  back  room  of  the  build 
ing.  I  went  there  as  they  had  been  placed 
there,  and  asked  him  if  he  knew  what 
those  boxes  contained.  He  said  he  did. 
I  asked  him  what  they  contained.  He  said 
pistols. 

Q.  Was  Mr.  Parsons  a  member  of  the 
Order  of  Sons  of  Liberty  ? 

A.  He  was,  sir.     He  gave  me  the  infor 
mation  as  to  what  the  boxes  contained. 
Q.  Did  he  say  what  they  were  for? 
A.  No,  sir. 


Q.  Did  Dodd  say  what  they  were  for  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  Dodd  never  mentioned  the 
boxes  or  pistols  in  any  manner. 

Q.  How  many  boxes  were  received  here 
at  that  time  ? 

A.  I  understood  ten  boxes  were  received. 

Q.  Were  any  more  received  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  Twenty-two  boxes  were  re 
ceived  about  two  weeks  after. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  who  had  purchased  or 
shipped  these  arms  ? 

A.  I  never  learned  who  purchased  these 
arms  until  after  I  was  arrested,  when  I  saw 
the  card  published  by  Mr.  Walker.  I  do 
not  know  of  my  own  knowledge. 

Q.  What  became  of  these  arms  ? 

A.  I  understood  that  they  were  seized  by 
the  authorities  here. 

Q.  Did  you  have  any  conversation  with 
Parsons  about  the  dispositions  of  these 
arms  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  think  Mr.  Parsons  knew 
nothing  about  the  matter  until  the  arms 
had  been  shipped,  and  until  a  few  days 
previous  ,to  their  arrival.  It  is  my  im 
pression  he  derived  his  information  from 
Dodd. 

The  Judge  Advocate  here  handed  the 
witness  a  letter,  and  asked : 

Q.  Do  you  know  by  whom  that  letter 
was  written  ? 

A.  That  letter  is  in  Mr.  Walker's  hand 
writing,  I  should  judge,  but  I  could  not 
swear  particularly  to.iji 

Q.  Did  you  ever  see  that  letter  before? 

A.  1  never  did,  sir. 

The  letter  dated  "New  York,  May  11, 
1864,"  addressed  to  "My  Dear  Dodd,"  and 
signed  "  Yours  truly,  W.,"  was  here  intro 
duced  in  evidence  by  the  Judge  Advocate. 

The  Judge  Advocate  handed  a  letter  to 
the  accused,  L.  P.  Milligan,  and  asked:  "Is 
that  your  handwriting?" 

A.  The  accused,  L  P.  Milligan,  replied 
"that  is  my  handwriting." 

A  letter/  dated  "Huntington,  9th  May, 
1864,"  addressed  to  "Gen.  H.  H.  Dodd," 
and  signed  "L.  P.  Milligan,"  was  here  in 
troduced  in  evidence  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate.* 


*HCNTINGTON,  IsB.,  9th  May,  1864. 

Geu.  H.  H.  DODD — Dear  Sir:  Yours  of  the  2d  inst. 
came  when  I  was  absent  at  Notre  Dame,  and  I  have  now 
just  read  it,  and  am  unable  to  make  any  definite  reply. 
I  will  barely  allude  to  what  may  afford  a  text  for  reply 
in  future. 

^\s  to  the  Gubernatorial  question,  it  may  not  have  oc 
curred  to  you  the  unenviable  connection  in  which  my 
name  has  been  used.  It  was  announced  in  consequence 
of  the  declination  of  theHou.  J.  E.  McDonald  to  be  a 
candidate,  conceding  that  if  he  was  a  candidate  there  was- 
no  desire  to  use  my  name  ;  now  I  understand  he  is;  hence. 
T  am  not  called  upon  by  any  public  notice  to  be  such. 
But  waiving  all  this  as  the  result  of  mere  accident,  and 
not  proffered  as  an  indignity  to  me,  by  placing  me  second 
in  talents  and  patriotism  to  J.  E.  McDonald,  there  is 
a  still  more  grave  difficulty  in  the  way.  Th«  announce 
ment  of  my  name  for  Governor,  was  made  by  McDonald's 
friends.  Now  it  is  due  to  them  that  I  should  decline, 
because  1  could  not  represent  them  ;  there  is  no  similar 
ity  between  us.  And  all  this  is  not  so  discouraging  as  the 
fact  that  nron  of  the  stamp  of  Judge  Hanua,  whose  pro- 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


89 


Q.  Do  you  know  P.  C.  Wright? 

A.  The  first  time  I  met  him  was  at  Terre 
Haute,  about  the  27th  of  August,  18G3.  In 
a  conversation  I  had  with  him,  he  informed 
me  that  he  had  originally  resided  at  New 
Orleans.  That  he  had  been  compelled  to 
leave  there  on  account  of  his  Union  senti 
ments,  and  removed  to  St.  Louis,  Missouri. 
At  the  time  I  saw  him,  he  was  staying  in 
Chicago,  and  represented  himself  to  be  an 
Attorney  at  Law. 

Q.  Do  you  know  where  he  is  now? 

A.  I  do  not  know  positively,  but  I  under 
stood  he  was  in  Fort  Lafayette. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Tuesday,  October  25,  at  2  o'clock,  P.  M. 

COXJET  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         ) 
October  25,  1864..  2  o'clock,  P.  M.  J 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  ad 
journment. 

All  the  members  present.  Also,  the 
Judge  Advocate,  the  accused  and  their 
counsel. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

Edwin  A,  Davis,  one  of  the  counsel  for 
Andrew  Humphreys  and  Horace  Heffren, 
submitted  to  the  Commission  the  following 
paper: 

To  the  President  and  Members  of  the   Military 
Commission : 

At  the  commencement  of  this  trial,  two  of 
the  defendants  asked- and  obtained  leave  of 
this  Court  for  me  to  act  as  their  counsel.  I 
now,  with  their  consent,  desire  to  withdraw 
from  the  position  I  have  since  then  occu 
pied,  in  such  a  manner  as  not  to  prejudice 
their  interest  before  this  tribunal. 

The  determination  of  the  Court  that  all 
the  defendants  should  be  tried  jointly,  in 
sures  them  all  able  and  experienced  coun 
sel. 

I  may  also  say,  that  when  I  was  retained 
in  behalf  of  the  defendants,  I  had  but  little 
idea  of  the  nature  of  the  charges  and  evi- 


fession  of  principles  I  could  represent,  prefer  McDonald 
On  account  of  his  supposed  availability,  it  detracts  much 
from  my  confidence  in  our  ultimate  success.  When  men 
of  so  much  seeming  patriotism  are  willing  for  mere  tem 
porary  purposes  to  abandon  the  great  principles  of  civil 
liberty,  what  will  those  of  less  pretensions  do,  when  the 
real  contest  conies,  when  life  and  property  all  depend  on 
the  issue,  when  bullets  instead  of  ballots  are  cast,  and 
when  the  halter  is  a  preamble  to  our  platform  ?  For  un 
less  Federal  encroachments  are  arrested  in  the  States  by 
the  effort  as  well  of  the  legislators  as  the  executive,  then 
will  our  lives  and  fortunes  follow  where  our  honors  will 
have  gone  before. 

I  am  willing  to  do  whatever  the  cause  of  the  North-west 
may  require,  or  its  true  friends  may  think  proper,  but  I 
am  as  well  convinced  that  upon  mature  reflection  they 
will  not  ask  me  to  obtrude  myself  upon  the  public,  nor 
will  they  ask  me  to  be  McDonald's  contingent. 

I  have  great  confidence  in  your  good  hard  man  ««»»«, 
and  coul  judgment,  hence  I  find  it  difficult  to  disregard 
your  advice  in  the  matter,  and  before  giving  to  the 
world  my  position  on  the  question  I  wish  to  see  you  per 
sonally.  Yours  truly,  L.  P.  MILLIGAN. 

N.  B.  My  last  was  confidential ;  this  is  more  so,  be 
cause  I  have  given  vent  to  feelings  that  are  purely 
private.  L.  P.  MILLIGAN. 


deuce  that  would  be  produced  against  them; 
but  from  the  nature  of  these  prosecutions, 
and  for  other  reasons  growing  out  of  my  re 
lation  to  the  Government  as  United  States 
Commissioner,  which  renders  it  improper 
that  I  should  defend  a  class  of  cases  fre 
quently  brought  before  me  as  an  examining 
officer  of  the  Government,  I  ask  of  this 
Court  that  my  request  be  granted,  and  these 
reasons  for  my  withdrawal  be  spread  upon 
the  records  of  the  Court. 

EDWIN  A.  DAVIS. 

The  request  of  Mr.  Davis  was  granted  by 
the  Commission. 

The  testimony  of  William  M.  Harrison,  a 
witness  for  the  Government,  was  then  re 
sumed  as  follows: 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate: 

S>tate  whether  a  Military  Committee  was 
appointed  at  the  meeting  of  the  Grand 
Council,  on  the  14th  of  June?  and  if  so, 
who  were  appointed? 

A.  I  have  no  recollection  of  the  appoint 
ment  of  such  a  committee  at  that  meeting. 

Q.  Did  you  receive  any  reports  from  any 
of  the  accused,  relative  to  the  strength  of 
the  organization  in  their  respective  coun 
ties? 

A.  I  received  a  report  from  Mr.  Heffren, 
at  the  meetings  of  the  16th  and  17th  of 
February,  of  its  strength  in  his  county. 
1  have  no  recollection  of  any  report  from 
others. 

The  Judge  Advocate  here  handed  the 
witness  a  letter  addressed  to  "  II.  I.  Stew 
art,  Boundary,  Indiana,"  and  signed  "H.," 
and  asked : 

Q.  Do  you  recognize  the  handwriting  of 
that  paper,  and  know  by  whom  it  was 
written  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  It  was  written  by  me  as 
Secretary  of  the  order,  on  the  day  on  which 
it  is  dated,  in  reply  to  a  letter  addressed  to 
me  as  Secretary  by  H.  I.  Stewart. 

Q.  Was  he  a  member  of  the  order  ? 

A.  The  letter  was  from  a  man  I  had 
never  heard  of  before  I  had  received  it. 
The  writer  purported  to  be  Secretary  of  a 
County  Temple.  He  wrote  on  business 
connected  with  the  order. 

The  Judge  Advocate  here  proposed  to  in 
troduce  the  letter  in  evidence.  The  coun 
sel  for  the  accused  objected  for  the  follow 
ing  reasons: 

That  the  letter  is  a  reply  to  a  communi 
cation  from  a  person  not  yet  proven  to  be 
a  member  of  the  order.  It  is  an  immate 
rial  letter,  and  proves  nothing  in  issue  be 
fore  this  Court. 

The  Judge  Advocate  replied: 

There  are  several  issues  presented  in  this 
case,  which  I  view  differently  from  the 
counsel  for  the  accused.  Mr.  Harrison  says 
this  letter  was  written  by  him  in  his  official 
capacity  as  Grand  Secretary,  to  a  man 
whom  he  supposed  was  a  member  of  the 
order.  Any  instructions  the  witness  gave. 


90 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


whether  written  or  verbal,  in  reference 
to  the  order,  are  competent  as  evidence, 
and  are  competent  as  showing  how  the 
order  worked,  and  whether  its  affairs  were 
conducted  in  an  open  or  secret  manner. 
Instructions  given  to  any  temple,  are  also 
competent  evidence. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  wished  the 
objection  to  go  on  record,  that  the  letter 
might  go  in  as  evidence,  under  protest. 

The  Judge  Advocate  replied : 

There  can  be  no  protest  in  this  Court. 
If  objections  are  made  by  the  counsel  for 
the  accused,  they  come  before  the  Court  to 
be  sustained  or  overruled. 

The  court  room  was  then  cleared  for  de 
liberation. 

On  the  re-opening  of  the  court  room,  the 
Judge  Advocate  announced  to  the  accused 
that  the  objection  had  been  overruled  by 
the  Commission,  and  the  letter  was  received 
in  evidence.* 

The  letter  was  here  read  by  the  Judge 
Advocate. 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate:  I  un 
derstood  you  to  say  this  letter  was  never 
sent ;  how  was  that  ? 

A.  I  wrote  the  letter  the  same  day  I  re 
ceived  the  letter  from  Stewart.  I  had  in 
a  measure  become  dissatisfied  with  the  or 
der,  and  had  resolved  to  abandon  it.  I 
hesitated  about  answering  any  letters,  but 
wrote  this  on  the  spur  of  the  moment  and 
placed  it  in  my  pocket,  without  determin 
ing  whether  I  should  send  it.  I  was  arrest 
ed,  and  this  letter  was  found  upon  me  and 
taken  from  me. 

Q.  When  were  you  arrested? 

A.  On  Saturday,  the  day  the  letter  was 
written. 

Question  by  the  Court: 

Q.  Did  an  answer  to  the  letter  from  H.  I. 
Stewart  come  within  the  general  scope  of 
your  duties  as  Grand  Secretary  ? 

A.  I  answered  every  letter  that  came  di 
rected  to  me  as  Grand  Secretary,  without 
any  special  directions  from  the  Council. 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate : 

State  to  the  Court  if  there  ever  came  to 
your  knowledge  any  plan  for  the  intended 
uprising  of  this  order?  If  so,  state  from 
whom  you  obtained  that  knowledge,  where 
the  uprising  was  to  be,  and  all  the  circum 
stances  connected  with  it. 

A.  I  received  my  information  from  Har 
rison  H.  Dodd,  that  there  was  a  design  in 
progress,  or  in  contemplation  for  the  release 
of  the  prisoners  of  war  confined  at  this 
point,  at  Chicago,  and  at  Rock  Island,  Illi- 


*  INDIANAPOLIS,  August  20,  1864. 

MR.  H.  I.  STF.WABT,  Boundary,  Indiana — Dear  Sir: 
Tours  under  date  of  the  17th  instant  is  at  hand.  Any 
information  that  you  may  desire  can  be  had  by  sending 
an  accredited  person  here.  Written  coinmunicHtions  are 
playfd  out,  as  all  letters  arc  opened  and  read  by  Lincoln 
spies  and  hirelings  during  their  transmission  through 
the  mails.  The  Reader  can  bo  had  at  $1  '20  per  dozen. 
Truly  yours,  H. 


nois.  That  plan  had  not  been  fully  de 
cided  on ;  but  if  decided  on,  he  was  to  have 
charge  of  the  release  of  the  prisoners  at 
this  point.  He  desired  to  have  a  Demo 
cratic  mass  meeting  called  about  the  16th 
of  August,  and  used  his  influence  to  induce 
the  Democratic  State  Central  Committee 
to  call  that  meeting.  If  they  did  so,  he  in 
tended  to  send  out  circulars  to  the  mem 
bers  of  the  order  in  the  various  counties, 
authorizing  the  members  to  come  up  to  that 
meeting  armed.  If  the  meeting  had  been/ 
held  at  that  time,  there  would  have  been 
an  uprising. 

Q.  When  and  where  did  he  state  this  to 
you? 

A.  At  his  residence,  on  the  evening  of 
the  29th  of  July  I  think.  It  was  on  Fri 
day  evening,  the  same  evening  that  the 
bulletin  board  of  the  Journal  office  an 
nounced  that  there  would  be  a  full  exposi 
tion  of  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty  in 
the  Journal  of  the  next  morning. 

Q.  Was  that  prior  or  subsequent  to  the 
meeting  at  Chicago,  to  which  you  have  al 
luded  ? 

A.  It  was  after  the  Chicago  meeting. 

Q.  Did  Dodd  at  that  time  state  to  you 
when  and  where  this  plan  for  revolution 
had  been  agreed  upon  ? 

A.  He  stated  to  me  that  he  had  been  to 
Niagara  Falls,  and  from  there  to  New  York 
City;  that  he  returned  again  to  Niagara 
Falls,  and  from  there  he  went  to  Chicago. 
I  understood  him  that  this  whole  plot  had 
been  arranged  at  Chicago. 

Q.  Did  he  give  the  names  of  the  persons 
whom  he  consulted  in  reference  to  this 
plan? 

A.  He  mentioned  no  names. 

Q.  Did  he  mention  whom  he  had  met  at 
Niagara  Falls? 

A.  He  stated  that  he  met  there  the  par 
ties  representing  themselves  as  Peace  Com 
missioners. 

Q.  At  what  date  and  to  whom  did  he  re 
fer? 

A.  It  was  about  the  time  of  the  meeting 
of  the  Peace  Commissioners  at  Niagara 
Falls.  I  suppose  he  referred  to  the  Peace 
"'ommissioners  on  the  part  of  the  rebel 
States. 

Q.  Did  he   state  what  the    rebel  prison- 
rs   were   to  do  after  the  uprising  on  the 
16th? 

A.  He  stated,  in  an  informal  way,  that 
they  were  to  aid  and  assist  in  the  uprising 
here. 

Q.  What  were  they  to  do  after  the  upris 
ing? 

A.  If  successful  in  the  uprising,  they 
were  to  be  taken  South. 

Q.  What  was  that  success  to  consist  in  ? 

A.  In  revolution. 

Q.  What  was  to  be  revolutionized  ? 

A.  The  Government,  as  far  as  the  State 
was  concerned. 


TREASON    TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


91 


Q.  Did  he  have  reference  to  the  General 
Government  ? 

A.  He  said  nothing  about  the  General 
Government.  It  was  a  revolution  which 
was  to  take  place  in  this  State. 

Q.  How  was  this  uprising  to  take  place, 
and  at  whom  was  it  aimed  ? 

A.  By  the  aid  of  the  rebel  prisoners,  who 
were  to  be  released  through  his  instrumen 
tality,  and  that  of  the  persons  who  came  in 
to  the  meeting  to  be  held  here  on  the  16th, 
they  were  to  have  an  uprising  and  overturn 
the  State  Government. 

Q.  Who  was  to  be  Governor  after  that  rev 
olution  ? 

A.  He  did  not  state. 

Q.  Did  he  state  particularly  his  plan  for 
the  release  of  the  rebel  prisoners,  and  how 
the  guards  were  to  be  overpowered  ? 

A.  He  said  if  the  thing  was  decided  on, 
he  was  to  release  the  prisoners  here.  He 
was  to  surprise  the  camp,  and  seize  the  ar 
tillery  here,  and  in  the  confusion  and  ex 
citement  of  the  moment  effect  the  success 
of  the  plan.  He  thought  he  could  do  this 
with  about  one  hundred  and  fifty  men. 
That  was  his  idea  which  he  communica 
ted  to  me? 

Q.  You  may  state  whether  there  is  an 
unwritten  work  of  the  order  ? 

A.  There  is. 

Q.  You  may  now  give  to  the  Court  an  ex 
position  of  what  that  is,  giving  the  collo 
quies,  signs,  grips  and  passwords. 

A.  The  unwritten  work  of  the  order  con 
sists  in  the  signs,  grips,  passwords  and  col 
loquies  of  the  order.  That  portion  of  the 
work  of  the  organization  was  never  written, 
but  communicated  verbally. 

Q.  You  may  now  give  the  unwritten  part 
of  the  Vestibule  degree? 

A.  The  Vestibule  lesson  is  that  in  which  all 
persons  who  design  to  become,  members  of 
the  order  are  first  instructed.  It  was  so 
arranged  that  a  person  who  took  the  Vesti 
bule  degree, knew  nothing  beyond  that.  In 
a  large  city  they  could  have  societies  of 
the  Sons  of  Liberty,  composed  of  members 
who  had  gone  no  further  than  the  Vestibule 
lesson,  and  meet  as  general  political  clubs. 
They  would  be  bound  by  the  obligations  of 
the  Sons  of  Liberty,  but  know  nothing 
further  of  the  organization  than  that  lesson. 

The  sign  of  recognition  was  made  by 
standing  erect  on  both  feet,  placing  the  heel 
of  the  right  foot  in  the  hollow  of  the  left, 
with  the  arms  folded  in  the  ordinary  man 
ner.  A  member  of  the  order  noticing  me 
in  this  posture,  would  suppose  he  was 
challenged.  He  would  place  himself  in  the 
same  position  and  challenge  me.  He  would 
extend  his  right  foot  to  meet  mine  and  use 
the  following  colloquy:  I  would  say  "nu," 
he  would  answer  uoh,"  I  would  reply  "lac," 
he  would  say  "S.."  I  would  answer  "  L.,"  he 
would  say,  "Give  me  liberty" — 1  would  an 
swer  "  or  give  me  death."  There  is  also  a 


signal  of  distress.  You  place  the  left  hand 
on  the  right  breast,  and  raise  the  right  hand 
directly  in  front  to  its  full  hight  once.  This 
is  given  in  the  day-time.  If  at  night,  you 
give  the  cry  of  distress  "oak-houn,"  repeated 
three  times.  You  wait  a  moment,  and  then 
repeat  it  three  times,  and  continue  this  un 
til  assistance  comes.  The  members  of  this 
degree  were  also  instructed  that  it  was  the 
duty  of  each  member  of  the  order  to  repair 
immediately  to  the  spot  and  assist  the  mem 
ber  giving  the  signal.  They  were  also  in 
structed  that  the  acorn  was  the  universal 
emblem  of  the  society.  If  the  person  was 
not  deemed  worthy  to  take  any  further  de 
grees  he  was  dismissed.  The  members  of 
that  degree  never  knew  any  thing  officially 
of  the  further  organization  of  the  order. 

In  the  first  degree  the  sign  of  recognition 
is  the  same  as  in  the  Vestibule  degree,  ex 
cept  that  the  index  finger  of  the  left  hand 
was  placed  on  the  right  arm,  when  the  arms 
were  folded.  We  were  instructed  that  this 
meant  State  rights  and  State  sovereignty. 
If  a  member  gave  that  sign,  it  was  the  duty 
of  another  seeing  it,  to  advance  and  recog 
nize  him.  The  grip  of  the  first  degree  is  an 
ordinary  grip,  in  which  the  index  finger  is 
placed  upon  the  wrist,  extending  upward. 
That  is  entitled  the  grip  of  the  acorn.  The 
colloquy  is  repeated  thus:  "If  I  go  to  the 
East" — "I  will  go  to  t-he  West."  "Let  there 
be  no  strife" — "between  mine  and  thine" — 
« for  we"— "be brethren."  "0"— "S"— "L"— 
"Resistance  to  tyrants" — "is  obedience  to 
God."  [The  colloquies  are  pronounced  al 
ternately,  as  indicated  by  the  dashes.]  This 
is  the  colloquy  of  the  first  degree.  In  this 
degree  members  were  instructed  in  the 
mode  of  entering  a  temple.  The  password 
of  that  degree  was  changed  monthly  in  each 
County  Temple,  which  adopted  its  own 
password.  The  members  were  instructed 
that  the  acorn  was  the  universal  emblem 
of  the  order,  representing  strength,  growth, 
and  durability.  Those  initiated  into  this 
degree  were  welcomed  as  full  members  of 
the  Order  of  Sons  of  Liberty. 

The  sign  of  recognition  of  the  second  de 
gree  is  given  with  the  body  in  the  same  po 
sition  as  in  the  first  degree,  the  hands  being 
crossed  on  the  abdomen,  the  right  hand  on 
the  left  and  the  thumbs  pointing  upward  to 
a  point,  which  is  said  to  represent  the  star 
Arcturus.  The  colloquy  is:  "What — a  star — 
Arc — turus.  What  of  the  night  ? — Morning 
cometh — Will  ye  inquire  ? — inquire  ye — re 
turn — come."  Members  were  instructed 
that  a  five-pointed  star  of  any  metal  could 
be  used  as  an  emblem  of  that  degree.  The 
password  was  "Orion,"  pronounced  as  a  test, 
by  giving  the  long  sound  to  "i"  in  the  sec 
ond  syllable.  This  is  the  unwritten  por 
tion  of  the  second  degree,  except  the  man 
ner  of  entering  the  temple. 

The  third  degree  is  similar  to  the  second 
n  the  position  of  the  body.  The  sign  of  recog- 


92 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


nition  is  made  by  crossing  the  arms  on  the 
chest,  the  right  arm  upon  the  left,  and  the 
fingers  pointing  to  the  shoulders.  The  col 
loquy  is:  "Whence — seir?  How — by  the 
ford?  Name  it — Jaback — Your  password 
— Washington."  The  response  is  "Bayard." 
The  distinct  pronunciation  of  the  last  syl 
lable,  ''yard,"  being  a  test  of  membership. 

The  sign  of  the  Grand  Council  degree  is 
given  by  clasping  the  right  hand,  and  taking 
hold  of  the  elbow  of  the  right  arm  with 
the  left  hand ;  then  give  a  simple  shake  of 
the  hand;  turn  one  quarter  to  the  left,  with 
the  arms  folded,  and  repeat  the  colloquy : 
"  Whence— America— North— South."  The 
password  of  the  Grand  Council  degree  is 
"America." 

A  member  who  wishes  to  enter  a  Temple 
of  the  first  degree,  makes  some  alarm  at  the 
outer  door  If  he  is  known  to  be  a  Son  of 
Liberty,  he  would  be  admitted  on  giving  the 
password,  without  any  further  trouble.  If 
not  known,  he  gives  the  password  and  is 
admitted  into  the  ante-room,  and  sends  in 
his  name  and  that  of  the  County  Temple  to 
which  he  belongs,  and  states  that  he  is  a 
visiting  brother.  His  name  is  reported  to  the 
presiding  officer.  When  the  name  is  an 
nounced  to  the  members  present,  if  any  know 
him  they  vouch  for  him ;  if  not  vouched  for, 
a  committee  of  two  is  appointed  to  test  him 
in  the  degree  in  which  the  Council  is  work 
ing.  If  found  perfect,  he  is  admitted ;  if 
he  fails,  he  is  rejected.  The  manner  of 
entering  Temples  working  in  other  degrees, 
is  the  same,  with  the  exception  of  the  pass 
word  used. 

Close  of  the  direct  examination. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

There  were  no  other  lessons  or  teachings 
pertaining  to  the  unwritten  work  of  the 
other  degrees,  than  those  I  have  given.  The 
military  features  of  the  Order  of  the  Ameri 
can  Knights  and  the  Sons  of  Liberty  were 
the  same.  From  what  Dodd  communicated 
to  me,  I  was  impressed  that  the  revolutionary 
scheme  included  Illinois  as  well  as  Indiana, 
and  that  himself  mainly,  and  certain  others 
who  knew  of  the  intended  scheme,  as  far  as 
it  was  decided  upon,  were  to  participate  in 
carrying  it  out,  and  in  the  event  of  circum 
stances  favoring,  the  whole  organization  was 
to  be  drawn  into  it.  The  intended  revolu 
tion  was  not  discussed  in  Council;  Dodd 
seemed  to  look  rather  to  the  action  of  in 
dividual  members  of  the  order  in  this  State, 
lie  was  to  take  charge  of  the  liberation  of 
the  prisoners  at  Camp  Morton,  near  this 
city.  Dodd  remarked  to  me  that  he  wanted 
to  influence  the  State  Central  Committee  to 
call  a  Democratic  mass  meeting  here  about 
the  16th  of  August.  If  it  had  been  called 
he  was  to  issue  secret  circulars  to  members 
of  the  order,  and  have  them  come  armed 
and  prepared  for  an  uprising.  I  do  not  be 
lieve  that  the  majority  of  the  first  and  sec 


ond  degree  members  ever  knew  or  thought 
that  revolution  in  Indiana  was  contemplated. 
Dodd,  I  know,  contemplated  holding  a  meet 
ing  here,  of  the  leading  men  of  the  organi 
zation,  for  the  discussion  of  his  plans,  and 
the  meeting,  I  understood,  took  place  on 
the  Tuesday  following  the  Friday  on  which 
I  had  the  conversation  referred  to.  The 
meeting  was  convened  by  circular  sent  by 
I  Mr.  Dodd.  The  military  bill  adopted  in  the 
I  Council,  referred  to  in  my  direct  examina- 
j  tion,  was  introduced  in  pursuance  of  injunc 
tions  received  from  Mr.  Wright,  the  origi- 
!  nator  of  the  organization  in  this  State.  His 
I  instructions  were  that  the  order  must  have 
a  certain  number  of  major  generals,  briga 
diers,  colonels,  etc.  Mr.  Wright  was  Su 
preme  Commander  at  the  time.  The  mili 
tary  bill  was  in  Dodd's  handwriting.  The 
military  appointments  were  made  by  the 
delegates  present  from  various  military  dis 
tricts,  who  selected  a  person  for  major 
general  for  their  district;  that  person  was 
announced  to  the  Council,  and  the  nomina 
tion  confirmed  in  Council.  I  can  not  state 
positively  whether  Mr.  Milligan  was  present 
or  not  when  the  military  bill  was  discussed. 
Neither  Mr.  Heftren  nor  Mr.  Humphreys 
was  present.  These  appointments  were 
made  at  the  first  meeting  held  about  the 
10th  of  September,  1863.  HeftYen  was 
present  at  the  meeting  of  the  16th  and  17th 
of  February,  and  that  was  the  only  meeting 
I  ever  saw  him  at.  Bowles  in  the  February 
meeting  declined  becoming  a  major  general 
unless  certain  changes  were  made  in  the 
length  of  the  term  of  service.  The  change  I 
understood  was  made,  and  I  did  not  hear  him 
object  after  that.  I  have  no  knowledge  as 
to  Humphreys  accepting  his  nomination. 
He  was  not  present  at  either  the  February 
or  September  meetings ;  but  was  present 
here  at  the  June,  1864,  meeting;  though  I 
did  not  see  him  in  the  room  till  the  even 
ing,  and  then  only  for  half  or  three-quarters 
of  an  hour.  I  did  not  see  him  at  the  Terre 
Haute  meeting.  I  know  that  Mr.  Hum 
phreys  was  a  member  of  the  order  from  the 
fact  that  I  saw  him  at  the  meeting  on  the 
14th  of  June,  but  have  no  knowledge  of  his 
initiation,  nor  of  that  of  a  majority  of  the 
members  of  that  Council.  No  person  who 
was  not  a  member,  ever,  to  my  knowledge, 
entered  the  Grand  Council.  It  convened  in 
the  Marion  County  Temple,  in  the  fourth 
story  of  Dodd's  building,  and  was  in  session 
from  10  in  the  morning  until  9  in  the  even 
ing,  adjourning  for  dinner  and  supper.  Mr. 
Humphreys  was  there  at  night.  I  saw  him 
there,  and  also  saw  him  at  my  office  after 
the  meeting  adjourned.  Mr.  Dodd  told  me 
he  saw  the  Peace  Commissioners  at  Niagara 
Falls,  and  had  conversations  with  several  of 
them,  but  did  not  say  any  thing  about  meet 
ing  thorn  in  a  secret  manner;  I  do  not  know 
whether  he  was  conspiring  with  them,  or 
was  simply  introduced  to  them.  I  know  that 


TREASON    TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


93 


Mr.  Heffren  was  Deputy  Grand  Commander, 
but  never  heard  from  him  in  reference  to 
the  organization  after  the  17th  of  February; 
he  was  not  present  at  any  meeting  after 
that. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate : 

Who  were  the  parties  that  were  sent  for 
to  be  present  at  the  Tuesday  meeting  ? 

A.  Mr.  Dodd  informed  me  that  he  in 
tended  sending  for  Mr.  Milligan,  for  Dr. 
Bowles,  Mr.  Humphreys,  and  Dr.  Yeakle; 
those  are  all  that  I  recollect  his  mentioning 
to  me. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  whether  he  sent  for 
those  persons  ? 

A.  1  did  not;  from  him. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  it  from  any  other  mem 
ber  of  the  order? 

A.  Dodd  told  me  he  had  sent  his  boy  for 
one  of  those  parties,  and  he  sent  me  for 
another  of  the  parties.  He  said  he  sent  his 
boy  to  Dr.  Bowles;  I  went  to  Mr.  Milligan. 

Q.   Did  you  see  him? 

A.  I  did. 

Q.  Did  you  tell  him  your  message? 

A.  I  did. 

Q.  What  did  he  say? 

A.  He  said  that  he  did  not  know  whether 
he  could  be  present,  but  would  try  to  be.  1 
was  instructed  by  Mr.  Dodd  to  say  that 
there  would  be  a  very  important  meeting, 
and  he  ought  to  be  present.  I  do  not  know 
whether  they  were  present  or  not. 

Q.  How  do  you  recollect  the  presence  of 
Mr.  Humphreys  on  the  14th  of  June? 

A.  He  had  never  been  present  at  any 
meeting  before. 

Q.  Was  your  mind  specially  directed  to 
him? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  see  him  enter  the  room? 

A.  I  do  not  recollect  seeing  him  enter  it. 
I  saw  him  in  the  room  just  previous  to  the 
adjournment. 

Q.  Were  any  persons  admitted  to  the 
Grand  Council  who  were  not  members  be 
fore? 

A.  No,  sir;  not  to  my  knowledge. 

Q.  Could  any  person  have  obtained  ad 
mittance' except  through  the  regular  pro 
cess  of  working  into  the  meeting  '1 

A.  No  person  who  was  not  a  member 
could  gain  admittance.  Those  delegates 
who  were  not  members  of  the  Grand  Coun 
cil  degree,  were  initiated.  They  had  to  be 
delegates  to  be  initiated  in  the  degree,  and 
become  members  of  the  Grand  Council. 

Q.  In  case  that  uprising  was  to  have  taken 
place,  who  was  the  proper  officer  to  lead  the 
uprising? 

A.  I  should  judge  Mr.  Dodd  was  the  of 
ficer. 

Q.  Had  he  the  power,  in  an  official  capa 
city,  to  order  that  here? 

A.  It  was  vested  entirely  in  Mr.  Dodd. 


Q.  Had  he  the  power  to  order  members 
of  the  order  at  will  ? 

A.  He  had. 

Q.  Did  he  have  the  power  to  call  all 
meetings? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Question  by  the  Court: 

Was  the  circular  sent  which  said  he  would 
send  to  the  different  temples,  directing  the 
members  to  appear  here  at  the  Democratic 
Convention  armed? 

A.  He  did  not  send  any  to  my  knowledge. 
He  did  not  say  he  had  sent  them. 

Q.  Was  the  convention  called? 

A.  It  was  not. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Thursday,  the  27th  of  October,  1864,  at 
10  o'clock,  A.  M. 

COUKT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         ") 
October  27,  1864,  10  o'clock,  A.  M.  J 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

All  the  members  present.  Also,  the 
Judge  Advocate,  the  accused,  and  their 
counsel. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

The  whole  of  the  session  being  occupied 
in  reading  the  testimony,  the  Commission 
adjourned,  to  meet  at  2  o'clock,  P.  M. 


COUKT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         ) 
October  27, 1864,  2  o'clock,  P.  M.  j 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  ad 
journment. 

All  the  members  present.  Also,  the 
Judge  Advocate,  the  accused,  and  their 
counsel. 

WESLEY  TRANTER,  a  witness  for  the  Gov 
ernment,  was  then  introduced,  and  being 
duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified 
as  follows : 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate: 

State  your  name  and  place  of  residence. 

Answer.  Wesley  Tranter;  Shoals  Station, 
Martin  county,  Indiana,  has  been  my  home 
for  four  years. 

Q.  What  has  been  your  business  for  the 
last  year  ? 

A.  I  have  been  running  a  saw-mill  and 
building  bridges  down  South.  My  occupa 
tion  before  was  that  of  a  miller. 

Q.  State  whether  or  not  you  ever  joined 
a  society  called  the  Knights  of  the  Golden 
Circle,  American  Knights,  or  Sons  of  Lib 
erty? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  1  joined  an  order  in  May, 
1863,  called  the  Circle  of  Honor;  the  last  I 
joined  was  called  the  Knights  of  the  Golden 
Circle. 

Q.  Where  was  that? 

A.  It  was  close  to  the  Shoals. 

Q.  How  long  did  you  belong  to  that  or 
ganization  ? 

A.  Up  to  January,  1864,  when  it  was 
turned  into  the  Knights  of  the  Golden  Cir 
cle,  the  second  degree. 


94 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


Q.  State  the  circumstances  of  your  join 
ing  the  Circle  of  Honor. 

A.  I  saw  Mr.  Horsey,  the  man  sitting 
there  (the  witness  here  pointed  to  the  ac 
cused,  Stephen  Horsey),  at  the  Shoals,  in 
May,  1863.  He  came  to  me  and  said  they 
were  getting  up  a  concern  ;  he  did  not  state 
what  it  was,  but  it  was  something  in  de 
fense  of  the  country — but  he  did  not  ex 
actly  tell  me  what  it  was  at  first,  nor  the 
name  of  it.  I  joined  it,  and  they  called  it 
the  Circle  of  Honor.  Horsey  said  they 
wanted  to  find  out  what  was  the  strength 
of  the  Democratic  party  at  that  time. 

Q.  Where  were  you  initiated? 

A.  In  an  old  house  belonging  to  a  man 
by  the  name  of  Gaddis,  about  a  mile  and  a 
half  from  the  Shoals.  It  was  a  vacant 
house  at  the  time. 

Q.  How  many  were  there  ? 

A.  I  could  not  say,  exactly;  I  reckon 
about  ten. 

Q.  Who  initiated  you  ? 

A.  Mr.  Horsey  and  Clayton  initiated  me. 

Q.  Who  presided  at  that  meeting  ? 

A.  Mr.  Horsey. 

Q.  Did  you  take  any  obligation  at  that 
time?  If  so,  state  what  it  was. 

A.  Yes,  sir;  but  I  do  not  recollect  what 
the  oath  was;  it  was  pretty  long.  There  was 
something  about  being  torn  into  four  parts 
before  we  would  reveal  the  proceedings; 
one  part  was  to  be  cast  out  at  the  east  gate, 
one  at  the  north  gate,  one  at  the  south  gate, 
and  one  at  the  west  gate. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  what  the  gates  meant  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Was  any  business  transacted  at  the 
meeting  besides  the  initiation? 

A.  None  at  all. 

Q.  When  was  the  next  meeting  you  at 
tended,  and  where-? 

A.  I  think  the  next  meeting  was  across 
the  river,  at  the  Pinnacle,  at  a  little  vacant 
house.  About  the  same  persons  were  pres 
ent  as  at  the  other  meeting.  Mr.  Horsey 
presided  at  that  meeting. 

Q.  What  was  done  at  that  meeting  ? 

A.  They  took  in  two  others. 

Q.  When  and  where  was  the  next  meet 
ing? 

A.  In  the  latter  part  of  the  summer  of 
1863,  somewhere  in  the  woods,  about  a 
couple  of  miles  from  the  Shoals;  it  was  back 
and  east  of  Horsey's  place.  About  eight  or 
ten  were  at  that  meeting. 

Q.  Were  any  steps  taken,  by  the  order, 
toward  arming  or  drilling? 

A.  Something  was  said  about  it;  they 
wanted  to  give  me  an  office,  but  I  would 
not  accept  it.  They  said  we  were  to  drill, 
and  be  ready;  that  we  were  to  have  our 
guns  fixed  in  case  any  thing  should  happen 
or  the  soldiers  should  ever  molest  us,  or 
any  thing  of  that  kind. 

Q.  What  was  the  purpose  of  this  organi 
zation. 


A.  Its  purpose  came  out  toward  the  last, 
that  we  were  to  support  Jeff'  Davis;  that  we 
were  to  have  our  guns  fixed;  that  we  did 
not  know  what  hour  we  should  be  called  on 
to  have  a  general  turn-out  to  support  Jeff 
Davis,  either  North  or  South.  That  is  what 
they  said  in  the  Knights  of  the  Golden 
Circle ;  but  in  the  Circle  of  Honor  they  did 
not  go  so  far. 

Q.  You  say  this  meeting  in  the  woods 
was  in  the  latter  part  of  the  summer ;  when 
was  the  next? 

A.  About  the  27th  or  28th  of  January, 
1864,  when  the  order  was  changed  to 
the  Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle. 

Q.  Who  were  the  officers  of  that  organi 
zation  ? 

A.  The  head  man  was  John  W.  Stone. 

Q.  Where  did  you  meet  ? 

A.  At  Gaddis'  house. 

Q.  How  many  were  present  ? 

A.  Somewhere  about  thirty. 

Q.  How  did  you  happen  to  go  to  that 
meeting  ? 

A.  I  was  asked  to  go  by  Anderson  Scar 
lett. 

Q.  Whom  do  you  remember  seeing  at 
that  meeting  ? 

A.  John  W.  Stone,  John  Teney,  William 
Teney,  Ike  Teney,  Stephen  Horsey,  the  ac 
cused,  Golden  Green,  and  some  few  others. 

Q.  State,  as  nearly  as  you  can,  what  was 
said  and  done  at  that  meeting. 

A.  I  went  there  from  the  Shoals,  and  got 
into  the  meeting  by  giving  the  sign.  It 
was  a  grip.  After  we  were  in,  Horsey  made 
a  little  speech,  and  said  we  were  to  have 
something  different  from  the  other  order. 
He  had  a  book,  and  said  something  about 
the  K.  G.  C.'s  and  Knights  of  the  Golden 
Circle.  He  said  that  before  any  man  was 
taken  in,  two  persons  were  to  stand  good  for 
him,  that  he  should  not  divulge  any  of  the 
secrets.  William  Teney  and  Hiram  Apples 
rose  and  stood  for  all.  Some  ten  or  fifteen 
were  sworn  in.  The  oath  differed  from  the 
former  oath,  but  I  can  not  recollect  it; 
there  was  something  about  supporting  Jeff 
Davis,  North  or  South.  In  a  speech  that 
John  W.  Stone  made,  there  was  something 
said  about  putting  Governor  Morton  out  of 
the  way. 

Q.  Was  Horsey  present  during  this 
speech  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  he  make  any  speech  ? 

A.  Not  that  1  recollect. 

Q.  Was  any  thing  said  at  this  meeting  as 
to  how  these  purposes  were  to  be  carried 
out? 

A.  Yes,  sir:  they  stated  they  were  first 
to  put  Morton  out  of  the  wa}r.  A  man 
who  signed  himself  M.  D.  was  to  pay  Gov 
ernor  Morton  a  visit,  and  he  was  to  live 
but  a  short  time  afterward ;  this  visit  was 
to  be  made  about  the  26th  or  27th  of 
March.  There  was  to  be  a  raid  made  on 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


95 


this  place  about  five  days  from  the  1st  of 
April. 

Q.  Who  were  to  make  this  raid  ? 

A.  The  men  of  the  lodge,  and  we  were 
to  arm  ourselves  to  be  ready.  We  were  to 
take  this  place,  wear  out  the  soldiers,  and 
release  the  prisoners. 

Q.  What  was  to  be  done  with  the  rebel 
prisoners  ? 

A.  Nothing  that  I  recollect;  only  that  we 
were  to  go  at  the  blue  coats. 

Q,  Was  any  thing  said  about  the  invasion 
of  Ohio  or  Indiana  by  the  rebels? 

A.  They  said  that  when  we  inade  the  raid 
on  this  place,  the  members  of  the  order  in 
Illinois  were  to  make  a  raid  on  Springfield, 
and  those  in  Missouri  on  St.  Louis.  Wash 
ington  was  to  be  attacked,  and  Forrest  was 
to  make  a  dash  into  Kentucky.  He  did 
make  a  raid  a  few  days  from  the  5th  of 
April. 

Q.  Who  developed  these  plans? 
•*A.  John  W.  Stone. 

Q.  State,  as  tar  as  you  can,  the  signs,  grips, 
and  passwords  of  the  Knights  of  the  Golden 
Circle. 

A.  If  you  wished  to  know  if  a  man  be 
longed  to  the  order,  you  gave  him  a  chal 
lenge,  by  placing  the  right  foot  in  the  hol 
low  of  the  left,  then  you  folded  your  arms ; 
if  he  is  a  member  and  notices  you,  he  does 
the  same  thing.  Then  each  advance  his 
right  foot  and  touch  toes  and  shake  hands, 
running  the  fore-finger  up  the  wrist,  and 
giving  a  single  shake.  After  you  had 
shaken  hands  you  were  to  say  0,  he  says  A, 
and  you  answer  K,  and  he  pronounces  Oak. 
He  was  then  known  as  a  brother. 

Q.  What  were  the  signs  of  the  Circle  of 
Honor  ? 

A.  To  know  if  a  man  was  a  member  of 
the  order,  you  draw  your  hand  across  the 
upper  lip ;  he  answers  by  doing  the  same 
thing  with  the  left  hand.  You  then  step 
forward  and  give  one  single  shake  of  the 
hand.  If  you  doubt  the  fellow,  you  ask 
him  if  he  saw  that  star;  if  he  was  a  mem 
ber,  he  would  reply  by  saying  he  saw  that 
star  in  the  East,  You  would  ask  what  it 
represented,  he  would  answer,  "  five  points." 
That  proved  to  you  that  he  was  a  full  mem 
ber.  To  recognize  and  test  a  person  at  a 
distance,  the  hands  were  clasped  and 
raised  above  the  head.  He  would  answer 
by  placing  his  hands  upon  his  shoulders. 

Q.  When  was  the  last  meeting  you  at 
tended  of  the  Knights  of  the  Golden  Cir 
cle? 

A.  On  the  26th  or  27th  of  January. 

Q.  Have  they  met  since  ? 

A.  Not  to  my  knowledge. 

Q.  Why  did  you  not  continue  with  them? 

A.  Because  I  thought  they  were  getting 
along  a  little  too  far  for  me,  when  they 
talked  about  helping  the  rebels ;  and  as  I 
had  been  in  the  army,  and  as  what  they 
avowed  wa^  against  my  principles,  I  came 


here  in  March,  1864,  and  reported  to  the 
Lieutenant  Governor  ? 

Q.  What,  if  any  thing,  was  said  in  refer 
ence  to  acting  with  Morgan  ? 

A.  Something  was  said  about  Morgan's 
making  a  raid,  but  I  do  not  recollect  what. 

Q.  Was  any  thing  said  about  offering  him 
assistance  in  case  the  State  was  invaded  ? 

A.  We  were  to  go  to  his  assistance,  as  I 
understood  it. 

Q.  Who  advocated  going  to  the  assistance 
of  Morgan  in  case  he  invaded  the  State  ? 

A.  John  W.  Stone. 

Q.  What  has  become  of  Stone  ? 

A.  I  don't  know.  He  had  some  difficul 
ty  with  the  men  of  the  17th  Indiana,  and 
some  of  the  boys  went  after  him  when  he 
made  off,  and  the  boys  fired,  and  1  under 
stand  he  has  since  been  seen,  minus  a 
finger. 

Q.  Who  were  the  most  active  members 
of  the  organization  ? 

A.  John  W.  Stone  and  William  Clayton. 

Q.  Was  the  order  armed  ? 

A.  Not  to  my  knowledge.  Something 
was  said  about  a  box  of  pistols.  Shirk- 
liff  and  a  man  named  Coffin  got  off  at  a 
station  five  miles  from  the  Shoals,  and 
Shirkliff  had  a  box  that  was  rather  heavy. 
Coffin  asked  him  what  the  box  contained, 
and  he  said  jewelry ;  but  Horsey  and 
Shirkliff  told  me  afterward,  the  box  con 
tained  pistols,  and  laughed  at  Coffin  for  the 
way  Shirkliff  had  fooled  him. 

Q.  Did  he  say  what  became  of  them? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Or  who  they  were  for  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  He  said  there  would  be  pis 
tols  taken  round  the  country,  and  any  one 
could  have  them  at  cost  and  carriage. 

Q.  Did  he  say  whom  you  could  get  them 
from? 

A.  No,  sir ;  but  I  suppose  he  meant  from 
himself. 

Q.  Have  you  been  in  any  lodge  since 
that  meeting? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  have  had  no  connection 
with  the  order  since  January. 

Q.  Who  did  you  first  reveal  this  order 
to? 

A.  To  my  father,  who  was  vexed  at  my 
having  joined  it.  1  then  went  to  my  uncle 
at  Washington,  and  told  him.  1  then  came 
and  had  a  talk  with  Captain  Henly,  of  the 
17th  Indiana,  and  got  him  to  write  out  an  affi 
davit.  And  the  statement  he  made  out 
was,  I  understood,  sent  to  the  Lieutenant 
Governor. 

Q.  In  case  Governor  Morton  was  assass 
inated,  who  was  to  succeed  him? 

A.  II.  H.  Dodd  was,  according  to  what 
was  said  at  the  meeting. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  forgot  to  mention  in  my  direct  exami 
nation  that  the  signs  of  raising  the  hands 
above  the  head  and  the  answer,  were  called 


96 


TREASON    TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


the  Morgan  signs.  If  we  joined  the  army 
and  were  captured,  we  were  to  give  these 
signs,  and  then  we  should  be  better  treated. 
This  was  told  us  by  Horsey  or  Clayton  at 
the  time  of  giving  us  these  signs.  I  did  not 
understand  that  because  they  were  given 
us,  we  were  to  join  Morgan,  but  I  under 
stood  they  were  for  self-protection.  We 
were  not  sworn  in  the  Circle  of  Honor  to 
help  the  South,  nor  were  we  pledged  to  do 
eo.  It  was  changed  to  the  Knights  of  the 
Golden  Circle  in  June,  1864,  by  John  W. 
Stone.  A  man  named  Baker  asked  why 
the  order  did  not  come  out  at  first  as  the 


ought  to  be  rallied,  and  I  wanted  Horsey 
to  go  with  me  and  tell  him  of  it,  but  he 
would  not.  Horsey  might  have  said  that 
Stone's  doctrines  were  too  secesh,  but  I  do 
not  recollect  his  saying  so.  If  Mr.  Horsey 
had  gone  over  there  with  me,  there  would 
have  been  no  Mr.  Stone. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate: 
Q.  When  was  it  that  you  had  this  conver 
sation  \vith  Horsey? 

Answer.  It  was  a  few  days  after  the  meet- 


Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle,  and  Horsey       Q.  Who   first  induced    you  to  join  the 

and  Clayton  said  they  wanted  to  find  out  order? 

how  far  the  Democratic  party  was  in  favor  I      A.  Horsey  was  the  first  man;  he  initiated 

of  such  an  order,  and  if  they  came  into  it  J  me. 

well,   then  they  would  change  it  into  the 


Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle.  By  the  two 
men  standing  good  for  us  at  the  initiation  into 
the  Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle,  I  mean 
that  they  were  to  kill  us  and  report  us  dead 
to  the  lodge,  or  bring  us  up  for  trial,  in 
case  we  divulged  the  secrets.  In  the  obli 
gation  that  wo  took  there  was  something 
said  about  having  JefF  Davis  for  the  nexi 
President,  and  votmg  for  him;  I  can  no 
remember  how  it  was  worded;  we  were 
sworn  into  the  service  of  Jeff  Davis,  anc 
were  to  support  him  whenever  called  upon 
They  said  that  all  Jeff  Davis  asked,  was 
that  the  three  States  of  Indiana,  Illinois 
and  Missouri  should  join  him,  and  he  would 
soon  thrash  out  all  the  blue-coats,  and  then 
they  would  go  eastward,  and  clean  out  al] 


the  rest  like  a  hurricane, 
voluntarily;   I  thought  I 


I  took  the  oath 
would   see  what 


they  did,  and  if  it  did  not  suit  me  I  would 
report  the  order.  The  first  time  I  divulged 
tlie  order  was  to  my  father  the  next  day, 
and  to  my  uncle  William  Tranter,  at  Wash 
ington,  soon  after.  About  the  last  of  Feb 
ruary  I  mentioned  the  matter  to  Captain 
Henley,  here  at  Indianapolis.  I  came  here 
on  purpose,  and  found  him  at  the  Bates 
House,  and  got  him  to  write  out  my  state 
ment  for  me.  John  W.  Stone  said  there 
were  100,000  members  in  the  Circle  of  Hon 
or  in  Indiana,  and  about  60,000  in  the 
Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle.  When  they 
changed  to  the  Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle 
they  dropped  off  a  little.  I  took  one  degree 
in  this  order.  John  W.  Stone  said  publicly 
that  if  we  took  the  oath  of  the  order,  and  were 
caught,  we  should  not  be  hung,  but  treated 
as  prisoners  of  war.  I  had  a  conversation 
with  Horsey  near  the  railroad,  within  two 
or  three  days  after  the  last  meeting  I  at 
tended.  We  were  talking  about  Stone  get 
ting  me  into  a  difficulty,  and  I  said  some  of 
the  soldiers  would  come  and  take  us.  Hor 
sey  said  he  did  not  think  the  soldiers  could 
do  it.  He  also  said  that  Stone  had  stated 
what  was  false,  and  that  there  was  no  truth 
about  paying  Gov.  Morton  a  visit.  I  said 
that  a  man  who  would  preach  such  doctrine 


Q.  Did  he  make  any  objection  to  your  ta 
king  the  Morgan  sign  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  he  make  any  objection  to  your 
taking  the  oath  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  lie  took  me  into  the  organiza 
tion  and  administered  the  oath  to  me. 

STEPHEN  TENET,  a  witness  for  the  Govern 
ment,  was  then  introduced,  and  being  duly 
sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as 
follows: 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate: 

State  to  the  Court  your  name  and  resi 
dence. 

Answer.  Stephen  Teney ;  I  live  at  Wash 
ington,  Daviesa  county,  Indiana,  where  I 
have  resided  about  a  year.  Previous  to 
that  I  lived  for  seven  years  at  Pleasant  Val 
ley,  Martin  county. 

Q.  What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  I  am  a  cooper  by  trade 

Q.  Did  you  ever  know  Stephen  Horsey  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  and  where  did  you  make  his 
acquaintance  ? 

A.  At  the  Shoals.  It  is  about  five  years 
since  I  first  knew  him. 

Q.  Did   you  ever  join   any  secret   order 
ailed  the  Circle  of  Honor,  Order  of  Amer 
ican  Knights,  or  Sons  of  Liberty? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  I  joined  the  Circle  of  Honor. 

Q.  Where,  and  when? 

A.  In  Columbia  township,  Martin  county, 
near  Connell  School  House,  in  the  fall  of 
1863,  at  Mr.  Horsey's  solicitation. 

Q.  Is  Mr.  Horsey  present  in  this  room  ? 
If  so,  point  him  out. 

[The  witness  here  pointed  to  the  ac- 
used,  Stephen  Horsey.] 

Q,  What,  if  any  thing  was  done  at  that 
meeting  ? 

A.  Fourteen  members  were  taken  in  that 
night? 

Q.  How  many  were  present  at  that  meet- 
ng? 

A.  About  twenty-live. 

Q.   Who  presided  ? 

A.  Mr.  Horsey  and  a  Mr.  William  Clay- 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


97 


ton  were  the  presiding  officers  at  that  meet 
ing. 

Q.  Were  you  sworn  in  that  night  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  what  obligation  you 
took? 

A.  We  were  to  bo  cut  into  four  pieces  if 
we  told  any  thing.  One  part  was  to  be 
cast  out  at  the  east  gate,  one  at  the  north 
gate,  one  at  the  south  gate,  and  one  at  the 
west  gate,  if  we  told  any  of  the  secrets  ? 

Q.  What  were  the  secrete? 

A.  We  were  not  to  tell  who  belonged  to 
the  order,  nor  any  thing  that  was  done  at 
the  meetings. 

Q.  What  did  you  learn  to  be  the  objects 
and  purposes  of  the  order  ? 

A.  From  what  I  saw  and  learned,  we 
were  to  assist  the  South,  if  called  on. 

Q.  Were  any  of  the  ways  by  which  you 
could  assist  the  South  talked  of? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  If  we  were  called  on  we 
were  to  ralty,  each  in  his  township. 

Q.  Under  whom? 

A.  I  do  not  recollect,  but  we  were  to  rally 
in  each  township  to  assist  the  rebels  if  they 
carne  through. 

Q.  With  arms  or  how  ? 

A.  They  did  not  say.  They  also  said  if 
we  did  not  rally,  and  stick  up  one  for  an 
other,  that  the  Democratic  party  would  be 
torn  down. 

Q.  What  had  that  to  do  with  giving  as 
sistance  to  the  rebels? 

A.  I  do  not  know;  that  is  the  way  Horsey 
and  Clayton  talked  to  us  that  night.  Hor 
sey  told  us  about  it  first,  and  then  Clay 
ton. 

Q.  Did  Horsey  say  any  thing  about  oppos 
ing  the  Government? 

A.  He  told  us  we  were  to  hold  ourselves 
in  readiness  at  any  time  to  be  called  out. 

Q.  State  whether  or  not  there  was  any 
arming  or  drilling  in  this  order  ? 

A.  We  drilled  a  few  times  in  the  town 
ship  ;  we  just  marched. 

Q.  Do  you  know  any  thing  about  an  at 
tempt  to  arm  the  order  ? 

A.  I  was  told  by  one  of  my  brothers,  Wil 
liam  Teney,  who  was  a  member  of  the  or 
der,  that  they  were  getting  arms  all  the 
time.  This  was  after  I  removed,  and  went 
back,  that  he  told  me  this.  The  order 
was  then  called  the  Knights  of  the  Golden 
Circle. 

Q.  Who  was  the  chief  of  that  order? 

A.  I  do  not  know.  I  went  there  once 
and  they  told  me  the  oath,  but  I  would  not 
take  it. 

Q.  What  did  your  brother  tell  you  about 
arms? 

A.  He  said  that  they  had.  three  hundred 
pistols  in  that  county ;  and  that  Baker,  of 
Dover  Hill,  went  to  Cincinnati  and  got 
some,  and  some  he  got  from  Philadelphia. 

Q.  Had  you  any  talk  with  Horsey  ? 

A.  Not  about  the  arms. 


Q.  When  was  the  last  talk  you  had  with 
lorsey  ? 

A.  It  must  have  been  some  four  or  five 
months  since.  He  told  me  they  were  get- 
ing  along  finely  with  their  order. 

Q.  What  order  did  he  refer  to? 

A.  I  suppose  he  meant  the  Golden  Cir 
cle. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  Horsey  make  any 
other  speeches  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

CROSS-EXAMINATIOX. 

I  am  in  the  army  now,  and  have  been 
since  the  draft.  No  inducements  have 
3een  held  out  to  me  to  testify  in  this  casf-, 

t  McDonald,  who  is  a  Government  de 
tective,  told  me  if  I  told  all  I  knew,  he  would 
do  what  he  could  for  me,  and  relieve  me 
from  the  draft.  Nothing  was  said  in  the 
obligation  about  supporting  the  Constitu 
tion  of  the  United  States,  or  the  Constitu 
tion  of  the  State  of  Indiana.  Mr.  Horsey 
said  we  were  to  support  the  South ;  he 
swore  us  to  support  Jen0  Davis,  North  or 
South.  That  was  a  part  of  the  oath,  and  we 
were  to  suffer  ourselves  to  be  torn  into 
four  pieces  if  we  did  not  support  Jeff  Davis 
North  or  South.  My  brother  told  me  this 
last  summer  that  he  was  a  member  of  the 
Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle.  During  the 
summer,  when  I  visited  my  brother,  I  went 
with  him  to  the  Knights  of  the  Golden 
Circle,  and  they  wanted  me  to  take  the 
oath,  but  I  would  not. 

KE-EXAMINATION. 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate: 

Has  any  officer  of  the  Government  held 
out  any  inducement  to  you  that  you  should 
receive  any  benefit  for  testifying  in  this 
case? 

A.  No,  sir;  only  what  that  detective  said; 
he  promised  to  do  all  he  could  for  me. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  asked  any  officer  of 
the  Government  to  relieve  you  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  expect  to  be  relieved  from  the 
draft? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  testify  from  any  such  induce 
ment? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  think  more  of  my  oath  than 
that. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Friday,  October  28,  1864,  at  9  o'clock, 
A.  M. 

COVET  BOOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,        1 
October  28,  1864,  9  o'clock,  A.  M.  j 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  ad 
journment. 

All  the  members  present.  Also,  the  Judge 
Advocate,  the  accused,  and  their  counsel. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

J.  J.  BINGHAM,  a  witness  for  Government, 
was  then  introduced,  and  being  duly  sworn, 
by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  follows: 


98 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate: 

State  your  name,  place  of  residence,  and 
business  ? 

Answer.  Joseph  J.  Bingham;  I  reside  in 
the  city  of  Indianapolis,  and  am  editor  of 
the  Daily  and  Weekly  Indiana  State  Sentinel. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  resided  in  Indian 
apolis  ? 

A.  Since  August,  1856. 

Q.  Where  did  you  reside  previous  to 
that? 

A.  At  Lafayette,  in  this  State. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  published  the  In 
diana  State  Sentinel* 

A.  Since  the  26th  of  August,  1856. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  join  an  order  called  the 
American  Knights,  or  Sons  of  Liberty? 

A.  I  joined  an  order  which  was  called  the 
American  Knights,  in  the  latter  part  of 
October  or  the  beginning  of  November. 
1863. 

Q.  Where? 

A.  In  this  city,  in  the  Military  Hall,  on 
Washington  street,  between  Meridian  and 
Pennsylvania. 

Q.  Who  was  in  possession  of  the  Hall? 

A.  It  was  leased  by  the  Democratic  Club 
of  this  city. 

Q.  Was  it  under  their  control  ? 

A.  It  is  my  impression  that  it  was  under 
their  control  at  the  time. 

Q.  What  was  the  first  meeting  of  the 
American  Knights  that  you  attended? 

A.  The  first  meeting,  if  you  can  call  it 
Huch,  was  my  initiation;  there  were  very 
few  present. 

Q.  Who  were  present? 

A.  Mr.  Dodd,  Mr.  Harf^on,  a  man  by  the 
name  of  Jacobs,  Dr.  Johnson,  and  I  think 
a  person  of  the  name  of  Vandegriff. 

Q.  Was  Mr.  Ristine  or  Hord  there? 

A.  Not  at  that  time. 

Q.  What  took  place  at  that  meeting? 

A.  It  was  only  an  informal  initiation ;  we 
did  not  go  through  all  the  ceremonies,  the 
greater  part  was  omitted. 

Q.  State  to  the  Court  how  you  came  to 
join  the  order,  and  at  whose  solicitation  you 
joined? 

A.  In  the  latter  part  of  August,  or  the  first 
of  September,  I  was  introduced  by  Mr.  Dodd 
to  a  man  by  the  name  of  P.  C.  Wright.  He 
brought  him  to  my  office  and  left  him  there; 
said  he  wanted  to  have  a  talk  with  me. 
Mr.  Wright  went  on  to  state  his  business; 
gave  me  a  little  history  of  himself;  he  stated 
that  he  was  a  lawyer  in  business  in  New 
Orleans,  at  the  breaking  out  of  this  rebel 
lion;  that  he  was  forced  to  leave  on  account 
of  his  Union  sentiments ;  that  he  went  to  St. 
Louis,  and  practiced  alternately  between 
St.  Louis  and  New  Orleans — in  St.  Louis  in 
the  summer,  and  New  Orleans  in  the  win 
ter;  he  said  he  was  a  lawyer  in  the  celebrated 
Gaines  case,  and  that  in  examining  the 
papers  of  General  Gaines,  he  came  across 
what  purported  to  be  a  secret  organization 


that  existed  during  the  Revolutionary  War. 
He  told  me  that  General  Lee  was  President 
of  the  Association,  as  appeared  from  the 
papers;  that  Madison,  Jefferson,  and  I  be 
lieve  Washington,  had  belonged  to  it;  that, 
it  had  exerted  a  very  powerful  agency  in 
maintaining  the  contest  during  the  war,  and 
establishing  our  present  form  of  govern 
ment;  that  he  thought  he  would  establish 
a  similar  order.  He  told  me  that  the  prin 
ciples  of  the  order  were  the  same  as  existed 
during  the  Revolution;  that  the  ritual  and 
obligation  were  nearly  the  same;  that  the 
papers  were  not  perfect,  but  the  omissions 
were  supplied;  and  that  he  came  to  this 
State  for  the  purpose  of  extending  the  order 
here.  He  said  it  existed  in  Missouri,  Illinois, 
and  even  in  the  Central  American  States;  it 
was  not  confined  to  the  United  States,  out 
was  to  extend  over  all  the  world,  not  limited 
by  any  geographical  divisions.  He  urged 
me  to  join,  and  take  part  in  it,  and  be  one 
of  the  persons  to  establish  the  order  here. 
I  said  1  was  opposed  to  all  secret  political 
organizations — that  I  never  saw  any  good 
come  from  them — and  declined.  He  visited 
the  prominent  Democrats  of  the  city,  and 
used  the  same  arguments,  but  most  of  them 
declined.  I  do  not  know  whether  Mr. 
Dodd  was  a  member  of  the  order  at  that 
time;  I  understood  he  intended  to  be.  Mr. 
Dodd  is  a  gentleman  very  fond  of  excite 
ment  ;  he  has  a  natural  taste  for  secret  asso 
ciations.  He  was  a  prominent  and  one  of 
the.  most  active  members  of  the  Know 
Nothing  order;  and  he  was  head  and  front 
of  the  Sons  of  Malta,  in  this  city;  his  taste 
runs  that  way.  I  have  known  Mr.  Dodd 
for  many  years;  for  three  or  four  years  I 
have  had  business  relations  with  him  that 
threw  him  constantly  in  contact  with  me. 
After  Wright  left,  Dodd  urged  me  to  join 
the  association.  I  declined  at  first.  Finally 
he  told  me  what  its  objects  were;  that  it 
was  to  be  a  permanent  organization;  polit 
ical,  but  not  partisan ;  that  it  was  to  sym 
pathize  with  the  principles  of  the  Demo 
cratic  party.  He  said  that  the  object  was 
to  educate  the  people  in  the  old  fashioned 
republican  doctrines,  the  same  as  those  en 
tertained  by  Madison  and  Jefferson;  that 
it  was  designed  to  establish  a  paper 
here,  to  be  the  organ  and  advocate  of  its 
principles,  and  that  it  was  intended  to  have 
a  large  university  near  the  city,  to  educate 
young  men  in  what  he  termed  correct  polit 
ical  doctrines;  and  that  the  organization 
was  to  be  permanent,  like  the  Odd  Fellows 
or  Masons. 

When  the  proposition  of  the  paper  was 
started,  he  said  he  wanted  to  advise  with 
me  about  many  matters  which  he  could  not 
unless  I  was  a  member  of  the  organization, 
and  that  he  could  not  even  tell  me  the 
names  of  the  members  of  the  order;  that 
was  one  of  the  obligations  of  secrecy;  but 
if  I  would  join,  he  would  not  put  me  through 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


99 


the  regular  ceremonies,  but  would  initiate 
me  informally,  and  if  I  did  not  like  it,  as  I 
joined  voluntarily,  so  I  could  leave  it  when-, 
ever  I  pleased.  I  thought  I  saw  in  this  the 
seeds  of  discord,  so  far  as  the  Democratic 

rrty  was  concerned.  Being  a  party  man, 
thought  the  only  way  to  secure  success 
was  by  the  uniting  of  the  different  elements 
in  opposition  to  the  Administration.  With 
that  view  of  the  case  1  joined  at  the  time 
I  named.  Dodd  informed  me  that  he  had 
appointed  me  a  delegate  to  the  State  Coun 
cil,  which  met  in  November,  1863.  I  at 
tended;  took  what  they  called  a  Council 
degree;  but  what  it  is  I  can  not  now  tell,  I 
paid  so  little  attention  to  it.  The  meeting 
was  held  in  the  Military  Hall.  Dodd  pre 
sided  at  the  meeting,  and  Mr.  Harrison  was 
Secretary.  I  do  not  recollect  what  other 
officers  were  there.  I  saw  Mr.  Vandegriff 
at  the  meeting;  and  I  think  Dr.  Athon, 
Mr.  Ristine,  and  Mr.  Milligan,  the  accused, 
were  present.  A  gentleman  named  Cush- 
man,  from  the  northern  partof  the  State,  was 
present. 

Q.  Were  any  others  of  the  accused  pres 
ent? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  What  business  was  done  at  that  meet 
ing? 

A.  The  Council  was  opened  in  due  form; 
those  that  had  not  taken  the  Council  de 
gree  were  initiated,  and  then  various  com 
mittees  were  appointed.  I  found  myself 
placed  as  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on 
Literature. 

Q.  What  other  committees  were  ap 
pointed  ? 

A.  I  do  not  recollect. 

Q.  Was  a  military  committee  appointed? 

A.  I  do  not  recollect. 

Q.  Were  any  appointments  made  by 
Dodd?^ 

A.  Not  in  my  hearing. 

Q.  At  what  time  of  day  was  the  meeting 
held? 

A.  It  convened  at  10  o'clock  in  the  morn 
ing. 

Q.  How  long  did  it  last  ? 

A.  I  was  there  about  an  hour,  but  I  un 
derstood  it  lasted  till  evening. 

Q.  Why  did  you  not  remain  ? 

A.  I  withdrew  to  write  my  report.  I  wrote 
a  brief  report,  advising,  as  far  as  a  paper 
was  concerned,  that  nothing  be  done  until 
means  were  raised  to  support  it  a  year ;  and 
I  recommended  the  indefinite  postponement 
of  the  university  scheme  until  the  next 
meeting  of  the  Council.  I  returned  then, 
and  some  other  business  was  going  on,  but 
I  do  not  recollect  what.  I  handed  my  re 
port  to  the  committee,  in  which  was  a  Dr. 
Bryant.  1  told  Cushman  that  my  engage 
ments  were  such  that  I  could  not  remain, 
and  he  would  oblige  me  if,  when  the  report 
'was  called,  he  would  read  it. 

Q.  Did    you    learn  from    any  members 


present  about  the   appointment  of  major 
generals  ? 
.  ,  A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  any  military  ap 
pointments  being  made? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  did  not  know  that  the  or 
ganization  embraced  any  thing  of  a  military 
nature  till  the  exposure  of  the  Sons  of  Lib 
erty. 

Q.  You  will  please  proceed  with  your  nar 
ration? 

A.  I  never  attended  what  is  called  the 
meeting  of  the  temple.  On  the  16th  of  Feb 
ruary  another  State  Council  was  held.  Mr. 
Dodd  informed  me  that  by  virtue  of  my  ap 
pointment,  I  had  a  right  to  attend.  I  went 
in  on  the  morning  of  the  16th.  I  had  been  to 
the  post  office,  and  stopped  on  my  way  to 
my  own  office,  for  a  few  minutes.  I  had 
nothing  to  do  with  the  meeting,  and  did 
not  feel  much  interest  in  the  matter.  ] 
was  in  again  for  a  little  while  in  the  after 
noon,  when  I  went  to  the  post  office  a  sec 
ond  time.  When  I  went  in  there  was.  a 
gentleman  of  this  city  making  a  speech, 
Major  Conklin,  and  this  was  the  first  time  I 
recollect  hearing  about  any  military  appoint 
ments.  I  suppose  he  had  been  called  on  for 
a  report  of  what  he  had  done,  for  the  drift 
of  his  speech — what  I  heard  of  it — was,  that 
he  had  not  drilled  any  body,  and  had  not 
any  body  to  drill.  That  is  all  my  recollec 
tion  of  that  meeting. 

Q.  How  did  he  come  to  report  that  fact  ? 

A.  I  suppose  he  had  been  called  upon  for 
a  report;  that  was  what  I  gathered  from 
the  nature  of  his  speech;  and  that  was  the 
first  idea  I  had  of  its  being  a  military  organ 
ization.  I  never  read  the  ritual,  or  the  con 
stitution,  or  by-laws.  I  think  Mr.  Heffren 
was  present  at  that  meeting.  Mr.  Heffren  is 
an  old  friend  of  mine,  and  came  to  my  office 
to  see  me  several  times.  At  one  of  those  inter 
views  we  exchanged  our  opinions  as  to  this 
association.  I  told  him  that  1  thought  no 
good  would  come  of  it.  Mr.  Heffren  coincided 
with  my  views,  and  said  he  believed  it  was 
a  humbug.  These  are  the  only  meetings  I 
attended.  I  did  not  wish  to  belong  to  the 
organization.  I  paid  my  fees,  and  asked 
Mr.  Dodd  if  any  formal  withdrawal  was 
necessary;  he  said  that  my  joining  was  vol 
untary,  and  I  might  withdraw  when  I  liked. 
I  did  not  consider  myself  a  member  of  the 
organization  since  that  time,  and  have  not 
been  a  member,  though  my  having  been  in 
the  order  gives  me  the  confidence  of  the 
members,  and  I  have  learned  many  things 
that  I  otherwise  should  not  have  known. 

Q.  Did  you  hear  the  address  of  Dodd  at 
the  meeting  of  the  16th  or  17th  of  Feb 
ruary  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  How  long  were  you  present? 

A.  I  was  not  there  over  twenty  or  thirty 
minutes.  I  heard  afterward  that  he  had 
delivered  an  address,  but  I  never  read  it 


100 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


till  I  saw  it  in  the  Journal  of  the  30th  of 
July. 

Q.  Who  was  present  at  that  meeting  ? 

A.  Colonel  Bowles,  the  accused,  Dr.  Bry 
ant,  Mr.  Blake,  of  Terre  Haute,  Mr.  Cush- 
man  and  'Squire  McBride,  of  Evansville. 
There  must  have  been  some  thirty  or  forty 
there,  but  few  that  I  was  acquainted  with. 

Q.  Was  Mr.  Milligan  or  Mr.  Humphreys 
present  ? 

A.  Not  to  my  knowledge.  I  did  not  see 
them  there.  Mr.  Heflren  was  present. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  what  business  was  trans 
acted  at  that  meeting  ? 

A.  I  asked  the  question  after  the  adjourn 
ment  of  the  meeting,  and  was  told  nothing 
particular  had  been  done 

Q.  Did  you  learn  who  had  been  appoint 
ed  to  the  Supreme  Council  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  know  who  composed  the  Com 
mittee  of  Thirteen? 

A.  No,  sir.  The  Committee  of  Thirteen, 
in  my  opinion,  was  a  myth.  The  next  thing 
that  came  up,  in  connection  with  the  order, 
was  this  :  Dr.  Bowles,  Mr.  Dodd.  Judge  Bul- 
litt,  and  Barrett  were  at  my  business  office. 

I  met  them  on  the  platform  as  I  was  going 
down  from  my  room;    I    was  introduced 
to    them,    and    supposed    they    were    all 
members  of  the  order,  though  nothing  was 
said  about  it ;  I  supposed  so  from  their  as 
sociation.     Judge  Bullitt  I  had  known  pre 
viously,  I  think  fifteen  years  ago;  he  had 
done  me  a  great  kindness;   we   renewed 
our  acquaintance,  and  he  asked  me  to  call 
and  see  him  at  the  Palmer  House;  said  he 
had    some  fine  Kentucky  whisky,  and  in 
vited  me  to  take  a  drink.     About  halfi  past 

II  I    thought  I   would    go  to  my  dinner 
early  and  stop   in  and  see  him.     I  knew 
where  the  room  was,  it  was  No.  28 ;  I  went 
right  up  stairs  and  knocked  at  the  door. 
He    said,  "Come  in,"    and   I   opened   the 
door.     The  first  man  I  saw  was  a  person  of 
the  name  of  Coffin.     I  did  not  know  then 
what  his  occupation  was,  but  from  his  asso 
ciations  I  thought   he   was  a   Republican, 
and  1  thought  it  was  queer  company  for 
Democrats.     I  walked  up  and  shook  hands 
with  him;  he  whispered  to  me,  "I've  have 
caught  you  at  last."     I  thought  that  was 
very  strange,  very  singular;  I  walked  around 
the   room,   and  mentioned   to  one  of  the 
gentlemen  that  it  was  a  singular  company. 
We  passed  the  salutations  of  the  day,  and 
I  then  said  to  Bullitt,  "If  you   have  any 
good  whisky,  bring  it  out."     He  brought  it 
out,  and  we  had  a  drink.     I  asked  Coffin 
if  he  was  going  to  dinner ;  he  said  he  was, 
and  we  walked   together.     As  we  walked 
out,  1  asked  an  explanation  of  the  remark 
he  had  made  to  me,  "I've  caught  you  at 
last."    He  told  me  a  story  not  necessary  to  be 
repeated  here,  and  applied  it  to  me ;  said 
that  was  all  he  meant.     A  few  days  after 
ward  I  met  Joseph  E.  McDonald,  on  Wash- 


i  ington  street.  I  told  him  the  circumstance, 
Sand  he  remarked  to  me,  "Don't  you  know 
!  who  this  Coffin  is?"  "He  is  a  United  States 
i  Detective ;  he  is  in  the  employ  of  the  Gov 
ernment,  and  has  been  for  two  years."  I 
remarked  to  him  that  it  was  a  singular  se 
cret  society,  the  members  of  which  should 
sit  in  council  with  a  United  States  Detec 
tive. 

Q.  Did  you  at  that  time  unfold  to  Mr. 
McDonald  your  association  with  that  or 
der? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  do  not  think  I  told  him  till 
sometime  subsequent, 

Q.  What  was  done  by  these  gentlemen? 

A,  They  never  told  me  their  business; 
and  to  this  day  I  do  not  know  what  they 
met  together  for. 

Q.  You  say  that  you  met  McDonald>  and 
that  you  remarked  to  him  that  it  was  a  sin 
gular  secret  association  that  should  have  a 
United  States  Detective  in  it;  how  did  you 
come  to  tell  him  that,  if  you  did  not  make 
known  to  him  that  you  were  a  member  of 
the  order  ? 

A.  We  had  talked  upon  the  subject  fre 
quently ;  I  do  not  know  if  he  knew  wheth 
er  I  was  a  member  or  not. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  give  him  to  understand 
that  you  were  a  member? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  From  your  conversation  do  you  know 
whether  he  was  aware  that  you  were  a  mem 
ber  of  the  order  ? 

A.  No,  sir, 

Q.  When  was  this  conversation  with  Mr. 
McDonald? 

A.  The  interview  occurred  about  the 
middle  of  May,  and  it  was,  I  think,  within 
a  week  afterward,  that  I  had  this  conversa 
tion  with  McDonald. 

Q.  Where  were  you  first  introduced  to 
Mr.  Stidger — in  your  office  ? 

A.  I  first  saw  him  there.  Every  Sunday 
morning,  about  9  o'clock,  a  number  of 
political  friends  met  in  my  office  to 
hear  the  telegrams  read.  One  Sunday 
morning,  about  the  1st  of  June,  I  was 
coming  down  to  my  office,  and  I  met  Dodd 
and  Stidger.  Dodd  introduced  him  to  me, 
and  I  recollected  the  man,  though  not  his 
name;  he  said  he  was  the  Private  Secre 
tary  of  Judge  Bullitt;  and  either  at  that 
interview  or  within  a  short  time,  a  day  or 
two,  Dodd  or  Stidger  made  this  remark, 
that  this  man  Coffin  had  compromised 
Judge  Bullitt,  or  that  Judge  Bullitt  thought 
he  had,  I  don't  recollect  which.  The  next 
meeting  of  the  order  here  was  held  in 
June,  but  I  know  nothing  of  its  proceed 
ings,  as  I  was  not  present.  That  brings  us 
along  to  about  the  first  of  August.  In  the 
mean  time  I  had  seen  Colonel  Bowles  once; 
he  came  to  my  office  one  evening;  said  he 
wanted  to  talk  with  me  about  matters  gen 
erally  ;  and  he  asked  me  if  I  thought  this 
man  Coffin  was  a  detective;  he  had  his 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS- 


doubts  about  it.     I  told  him  there  was  no 
doubt  about  it. 

Q.  PYom  whom  did  you  have  it? 

A.  Mr.  McDonald.  Another  circumstance 
it  may  be  well  to  relate;  it  shows  the  per 
fect  system  of  espionage  here. 

[The  Judge  Advocate  remarked  that  it 
was  unnecessary  to  state  that  here.] 

I  do  not  recollect  any  thing  special  oc 
curring  until  the  2d  or  3d  of  August. 
About  that  time,  one  morning  Mr.  Dodd 
came  into  my  room  and  said,  "I  want  to 
have  a  talk  with  you."  He  said  he  wanted 
to  tell  me  something;  "but,"  said  he,  "you 
must  give  me  your  word  of  honor  that  what 
I  say  to  you,  you  will  not  reveal  to  any  living 
being."  Not  knowing  what  it  was,  I  said, 
"Certainly."  He  went  on  to  Bay  it  had 
been  determined  at  a  meeting,  or  Council, 
I  do  not  recollect  which,  I  think  he  said  at 
a  Council  of  Sixteen ;  I  believe  he  said  some 
thing  about  its  being  composed  of  four 
from  Indiana,  four  from  Illinois,  four  from 
Kentucky,  and  four  from  Missouri;  I  do 
not  think  any  names  were  mentioned  but 
Judge  Bullitt  and  Mr.  Bowles  ;  he  said  that 
at  the  Council,  a  resolution  had  been  deter 
mined  upon,  and  he  went  on  to  explain  it. 
He  said  that  arrangements  had  been  made  to 
release  the  prisoners  oi\  Johnson's  Island; 
at  Camp  Chase,  near  Columbus,  Ohio ;  at 
Camp  Morton,  and  also  at  Camp  Douglas, 
and  that  the  prisoners  at  Camp  Douglas, 
after  their  release,  were  to  go  over  and  re 
lease  those  at  Rock  Island.  At  the  same 
time  there  was  to  be  an  uprising  at  Louis 
ville,  at  which  the  Government  stores,  etc., 
were  to  be  seized. 

Q.  An  uprising  of  what  and  who  ? 

A.  He  did  not  state  what  or  who;  he 
*aid  an  "  uprising."  1  looked  at  the  man 
in  astonishment.  I  thought  it  was  a  wild 
dream;  I  could  not  believe  it  possible. 
I  studied  a  moment,  and  said,  "Mr.  Dodd, 
do  you  know  what  you  are  going  to  under 
take  ?  Do  you  know  the  position  of  mili 
tary  affairs  here  at  this  post  ?  Do  you 
think  you  can  accomplish  this  scheme  with 
any  number  of  unarmed  and  undisciplined 
men  you  can  bring  here  ?"  Another  thing  he 
remarked  to  me  was  that  this  revolution 
was  going  to  take  place  at  several  points  on 
the  16th  of  August,  and  that  I  was  the 
only  person  he  communicated  this  to  in 
the  city.  I  asked  "  how  is  this  revolution 
to  take  place,  and  nobody  know  any  thing 
about  it?"  As  to  the  way  in  which  it  was 
to  be  done  here,  and  at  Louisville,  he  made 
a  suggestion  to  me,  as  I  was  Chairman  of 
the  Democratic  State  Central  Committee, 
which  was  that  I  should  call  a  mass  meet 
ing  of  the  Democracy  on  the  16th  of  August. 
I  said  we  had  had  experience  enough  of 
Democratic  mass  meetings,  and  there  would 
be  no  excuse  or  apology  for  calling  such  a 
meeting  here.  I  asked  him  what  excuse 
he  could  give  for  calling  the  meeting.  He 


said  to  take  some  expression  against  the 
draft,  and  to  give  some  instructions  to  the 
delegates  who  attended  the  Chicago  Con 
vention,  which  was  to  be  held  on  the  29th 
of  August.  I  told  him  I  could  consent  to 
nothing  of  the  kind,  and  would  be  a  party 
to  no  such  scheme.  W.  H.  Talbot,  Chair 
man  of  the  Democratic  Central  Congres 
sional  District,  had  gone  to  New  York,  and 
he  left  me  to  act  in  his  absence.  Dodd 
knew  this,  and  on  my  declining  to  call  a 
meeting,  as  chairman  of  the  Democratic 
State  Central  Committee,  he  wanted  me  to 
call  a  District  mass  meeting  to  nominate  a 
candidate  for  this  Congressional  District. 
I  told  him  I  would  not.  Dodd  then  made 
application  to  others,  also  to  McDonald  to 
urge  him  to  induce  me  to  call  a  mass  meet 
ing,  but  I  declined  to  do  it.  I  then  began 
to  think  seriously  about  the  matter,  and  to 
reflect  what  was  best  to  be  done.  I  had 
been  intrusted  with  an  important  secret, 
and  it  was  of  such  a  nature  that  I  thought 
I  ought  not  to  keep  it.  I  then  determined 
to  investigate  the  matter.  I  first  called  on 
Mr.  Ristine,  and  I  put  leading  questions  to 
him  to  find  out  whether  or  not  he  knew 
of  any  such  project,  as- that  which  had  been 
communicated  to  me  by  Mr.  Dodd,  and  I 
felt  satisfied  that  he  did  not.  I  then  called 
upon  Mr.  Athon,  and  in  the  same  way  I 
asked  him  leading  questions  to  find  out 
what  he  knew  about  the  matter,  and  I  felt 
satisfied  he  knew  nothing  about  it  I 
spoke  to  others,  to  Mr.  Hord  among  the 
rest.  I  went  to  bed  and  slept  over  it. 

In  the  morning  I  went  to  see  Mr.  J.  E. 
McDonald.  I  told  him  I  had  secret  infor 
mation  that  I  wished  to  consult  him  about; 
that  it  was  a  matter  involving  us  all,  and 
that  some  action  had  to  be  taken  immedi 
ately.  He  said  he  was  willing  to  listen  to 
all  I  had  to  say.  This  was  on  the  night  of 
the  4th  of  August.  I  told  Mr.  McDonald 
all  that  Dodd  had  told  me,  and  the  circum 
stances  under  which  he  had  told  it,  and 
that  I  had  come  to  advise  with  him  as  to 
what  was  my  duty  in  the  matter.  We 
talked  the  matter  over  sometime,  and 
finally  came  to  the  conclusion  that  we 
would  sleep  over  it,  but  that  the  thing 
must  be  stopped  at  all  hazards.  I  left  him 
at  9  o'clock,  and  went  to  my  office.  As  I 
walked  down  Washington  street  I  saw  a 
gentleman  coming  up  rapidly,  and  I  stopped 
him :  "  Halloo  !  Kerr,  what  has  brought  you 
here  ?"  I  said.  He  seemed  very  much  exci 
ted.  "Do  you  know  any  thing?"  he  said;  and 
I  said,  "Do  you  know  anything?1'  "Yes," 
he  replied.  "What  is  it?'f  said  I.  He  then 
said,  "The  devil's  to  pay  in  our  section  of 
the  State;  the  people  of  Washington,  Har 
rison  and  Floyd  counties,  and  that  neigh 
borhood,  had  got  the  idea  that  a  revolution 
was  impending;  the  farmers  were  fright- 
ened,  and  were  selling  their  hay  in  the 
fields  and  their  wheat  in  the  stacks,  and  all 


TREASON  TRIALS  AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


the  property  that  could  be  was  being  con 
verted  into  greenbacks." 

Q.  What  Kerr  was  that? 

A.  Michael  C.  Kerr.  "Is  that  all  you 
know?"  I  said.  "No,"  said  he.  Then  he 
went  on  and  represented  to  me  just  what 
Dodd  had  before  told  me.  He  went  over  the 
whole  scheme,.just  as  Dodd  had  revealed  it. 
As  we  walked  along,  he  turned  around  once 
or  twice  to  see  if  any  detectives  were  follow 
ing  us.  I  didn't  let  him  know  that  I  knew 
anything  about  the  matter.  I  said.  "This  is  a 
most  important  matter,  and  I  insist  that  you 
go  up  to  Mr.  McDonald's  with  me,  and  tell 
him  what  you  have  told  me."  We  got  him 
up,  and  I  said  to  him,  "Kerr  has  got  some 
important  information,  and  I  want  him 
to  tell  you  the  same  story  that  he  has  told 
me." 

Q.  Did  you,  previous  to  that  time,  or  at 
that  time,  as  a  matter  of  safety  to  yourself, 
state  to  McDonald  your  whole  connection 
with  the  matter? 

A.  1  think  he  understood  that  I  was  a 
member  of  the  order. 

Q.  Did  you  give  him  the  whole  history  of 
the  matter  ? 

A.  He  understood  I  was  a  member  of  the 
order.  In  this  conversation  with  Mr.  Kerr, 
he  involved  Dr.  Athon  in  the  scheme.  I 
think,  also,  he  told  me  that  Governor  Mor 
ton  was  to  be  captured  or  taken  prisoner, 
and  that  Dr.  Athon  was  to  be  Provisional 
Governor,  and  that  was  to  be  part  of  the 
scheme.  McDonald  said  we  would  all  meet 
in  the  morning,  as  had  been  agreed  upon. 
Coming  out,  I  said  that  I  could  not  rest 
under  the  suspicion  that  Dr.  Athon  knew 
any  thing  of  the  scheme.  I  did  not  think 
that  he  did  ;  and  I  said  that  although  it 
was  after  12  o'clock,  I  would  go  to  his 
house.  We  went  and  called  him  up.  He 
came  down,  and  I  told  him,  that  although 
it  was  such  a  late  hour,  yet  as  Mr.  Kerr 
had  come  with  such  important  information 
he  ought  to  know  it  that  night.  He  agreed 
to  meet  with  us  the  next  morning  at  Mc 
Donald's  office.  Coming  out,  I  asked  what 
he  thought  of  Dr.  Athon  ?  He  said,  "  He  is  an 
innocent  man.  He  knows  nothing  about 
this  scheme."  Athon  would  scarcely  be 
lieve  that  such  a  scheme  was  entertained. 
I  think  he  said:  "It's  all  gas;  such  a 
scheme  can  not  be  entertained  by  sensible 
men." 

The  next  day  we  went  about  8  or  9 
o'clock  to  McDonald's  office.  I  had  invited 
in  all  the  prominent  Democrats  I  could  see. 
Judge  Khoads  was  present;  McDonald  was 
present;  William  Henderson,  of  this  city; 
Mr.  Hord,  Aquilla  Jones,  Samuel  H.  Bus- 
kirk,  Mr.  Ilistirie,  I  think,  Dr.  Yeakle,  and 
Colonel  Caldwell,  of  Lafayette,  and  there 
may  have  been  others.  Mr.  Kerr  then  told 
the  story  to  those  present.  Then  we  had  a 
consultation  about  the  matter,  and  came  to 


stopped  right   then.     After  awhile    Dodd 
and  John  C.  Walker  came  in. 

Q.  Was  Dodd  sent  for,  or  did  he  come  of 
lis  own  volition  ? 

A.  I  think  he  was  told  that  a  meeting 
,vas  to  be  held  there  that  morning  for  con 
sultation.  Walker  had  arrived  from  New 
York  that  morning.  This  meeting  occur- 
:ed  on  Friday,  the  5th  of  August.  Mr. 
Kerr  made  a  speech.  He  spoke  about  this 
excitement — this  revolutionary  scheme — 
and  that  he  came  up  on  purpose  to  put  a  stop 
to  the  thing.  I  think  he  said  that  it  was  our 
duty  to  stop  it,  and  I  coincided ;  and  if  it 
could  not  be  stopped  in  any  other  way,  it 
was  our  duty  to  inform  the  authorities, 
doloner  Walker  and  Dodd  did  not  acknowl 
edge  at  that  interview  that  any  such 
scheme  was  entertained.  They  both  spoke, 
and  very  earnestly,  about  the  state  of  pub 
lic  affairs,  and  they  used  about  these  argu 
ments:  That  the  Government  could  not  be 
restored  again  under  the  old  state  of  things 
without  a  forcible  revolution.  That  an  ap 
peal  to  the  ballot-box  was  all  folly  ;  that  the 
people  were  prepared  for  revolution;  that 
they  would  not  submit  to  the  draft ;  and 
that  it  was  better  to  direct  the  revolution 
than  to  have  revolution  direct  us.  That 
was  about  what  they  said.  Before  we  left 
there,  these  gentlemen  agreed  that  this 
whole  matter  should  be  stopped,  and  we 
were  satisfied  from  the  pledges  they  gave 
us,  that  the  thing  would  be  stopped.  But 
how  they  intended  to  do  it,  I  do  not  know;  I 
understood  they  would  send  messengers 
to  those  various  points,  arid  state  that  that 
was  their  determination.  Th-f  assured  us 
that  we  need  have  no  further  apprehen 
sions  about  the  matter,  and  we  rested  con 
tent  with  that  v 

I  was  satisfied  at  that  time — and  the 
question  was  asked  me  the  other  day  why  I 
did  not  inform  the  authorities,  but  I  was 
satisfied  that  the  authorities  knew  as  much 
as  I  did,  and  from  this  one  circumstance 
among  others.  The  signal  of  the  uprising 
at  Louisville,  was  to  be  the  notice  of  a  bar 
becue  to  take  place  in  the  neighborhood  of 
Louisville.  It  was  understood  that  the  up 
rising  was  to  take  place  on  the  day  an 
nounced  for  that  barbecue.  Mr.  Kerr  in^ 
formed  us  that  night,  in  our  interview  with 
McDonald,  that  Judge  Bullitt  had  that  day 
or  the  day  previous  been  arrested.  Also 
that  many  of  the  prominent  members  of 
the  order  and  others,  had  fled  the  State,  and 
the  reason  was  the  publication  of  that  bar 
becue.  A  good  many  of  them  had  come  up 
on  the  same  train  with  him,  and  others  had 
left  the  day  before.  They  had  gone  to  New. 
York  and  Canada.  I  was  satisfied  from  that 
fact  that  the  authorities  knew  as  much 
about  the  matter  as  I  did.  And  this  was 
confirmed  a  day  or  two  afterward  by  a  re- 
mark  that  fell  from  General  Carrington.  II  e 


the  conclusion   that   the   matter   must  be! spoke  of  this  thing  to  Mr.  McDonald,  and 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


10; 


Mr.  McDonald  and  myself  were  both  satis 
fied  that  the  authorities  were  fully  informed, 
and  the  circumstances  seem  to  have  shown 
that  they  were.  They  were  informed  of  it 
before  I  was.  Stidger  was  informed  of  it 
on  the  29th  of  July,  three  or  four  days  be 
fore  it  was  communicated  to  me,  so 
that  General  Carrington  and  the  author 
ities  must  have  known  of  it  on  the  night  of 
the  29th  of  July.  We  had  then  called  the 
Democratic  State  Central  Committee  to 
meet  on  the  17th  of  August,  to  fill  vacan 
cies  on  the  State  ticket,  and  to  report,  etc 
I  regarded  this  matter  as  most  important 
in  its  effects  upon  the  Democratic  party, 
and  that  was  another  reason  why  I  did  not 
wish  to  say  any  thing  about  it,  for  if  this 
thing  had  been  made  public,  it  would  injure 
us  in  the  coming  election;  the  charge  would 
be  made  that  the  Democratic  party  was  a 
revolutionary  party,  and  we  would  have 
been  saddled  with  the  sins  of  these  men. 
Another  thing,  it  was  a  matter  of  personal 
honor.  I  received  this  information  from 
those  gentlemen  under  peculiar  circum 
stances,  and  after  I  found  the  thing  was 
stopped,  I  did  not  feel  it  incumbent  on 
me  to  inform  the  authorities.  I  advised 
the  gentlemen  to  leave  before  they  should  be 
arrested.  Dodd  was  here  two  weeks  after, 
and  Walker  was  here  from  the  5th  to  the 
15th  of  August  without  being  arrested.  My 
conversation  at  the  time  .the  authorities 
knew  about  it — for  I  had  every  reason  to 
believe  it — made  me  come  to  this  conclu 
sion.  I  told  them  as  a  friend,  that  if  they 
remained  here  they  would  be  arrested.  They 
thought  so  and  left. 

Q.  At  this  meeting,  at  which  Mr.  McDon 
ald  and  others  were  present,  did  Mr.  Dodd 
confess  that  his  scheme  was  true? 

A.  No,  sir;  but  rather  denied  it.  He 
neither  confessed  nor  denied  it,  but  said 
that  revolution  was  necessary. 

Q.  Was  it  charged  upon  him  by  Mr.  Iverr 
that  it  was  true  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  did  he  refuse  to  acknowledge  the 
fact? 

A.  He  refused  to  deny  or  acknowledge  it. 

Q.  Why  did  you  not  make  known  to 
those  persons  who  did  not  know  it,  that  it 
was  true? 

A.  WTe  did,  sir.  All  present  understood 
it  thoroughly.  We  conversed  an  hour  or 
two  before  these  gentlemen  came  in. 

We  had  a  meeting  of  the  Central  Com 
mittee  on  the  12th  of  August.  I  stated  in 
the  notice  sent  out  on  'the  6th  of  August, 
that  matters  of  grave  importance  demanded 
a  large  attendance,  and  it  was  hoped  that 
all  the  Committee  would  attend,  and  we  in 
vited  other  prominent  men  in  the  State. 
We  had  quite  a  large  meeting.  We  filled 
up  the  vacancies  on  the  State  ticket,  and 
then  this  matter  came  up  for  discussion.  Mr. 
Kerr  was  present,  and  at  my  request  he  laid 


this  whole  affair  before  the  members  of  the 
Committee,  and  the  same  resolution  came 
up  there  we  had  in  our  previous  consulta 
tion,  that,  if  the  thing  had  not  been  stopped, 
it  must  be  now.  We  had  to  bo  satisfied  on 
that  point. 

Colonel  Walker  came  to  that  meeting. 
We  had  a  two-days  meeting — the  12th  and 
the  13 tli.  And  he  assured  the  Committee 
that  it  was  stopped,  that  nothing  of  the 
kind  should  take  place. 

Q.  Was  it  previous  to,  or  after  this  meet 
ing  of  the  Council  of  Sixteen  at  Chicago, 
that  you  met  Mr.  Walker  here,  and  had  a 
conversation  with  him,  in  reference  to  any 
rebel  officers  going  to  Illinois,  to  take  charge 
of  the  rebel  prisoners  ? 

A.  1  saw  Mr.  Walker  previously,  once  or 
twice,  while  he  was  here.  I  met  him  on 
the  street,  and  he  complained  that  I  had 
not  seen  him.  He  was  sleeping,  at  Colonel 
Hose's  room,  in  this  building,  at  the  time. 
Colonel  Rose  was  absent  at  the  time.  He 
is  a  brother-in-law  of  Colonel  Rose.  This 
was  on  the  morning  of  the  llth.  He  went 
to  the  Bates  House,  and  said  he  regretted 
to  have  to  go  to  the  Bates  House,  it  was  a 
bad  place  to  stop  at.  1  asked  him  why  he 
was  going.  He  said  he  had  to  meet  these 
gentlemen  by  appointment.  I  understood 
him  to  say  they  were  rebel  officers.  They 
would  be  there  that  day,  and  unless  he  was 
there,  they  would  not  know  where  to  find 
him.  He  said  they  were  on  their  way  to 
Chicago  to  take  charge  of  the  rebel  prison 
ers  when  they  were  released  from  Camp 
Douglas.  It  was  necessary  that  he  should 
see  them,  to  tell  them  that  the  whole 
scheme  was  stopped.  He  met  me  afterward, 
and  said  he  had  seen  them,  and  they  had 
gone  on  and  stopped  all  operations  at  that 
time,  for  the  release  of  the  prisoners. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

Question  by  the  accused: 

To  what  extent  was  this  scheme  of  revo 
lution  known  and  entertained  in  this  order, 
and  out  of  it,  as  far  as  you  know  ? 

A.  All  that  I  know  is  that  it  was  commu 
nicated  to  me  under  those  circumstances, 
and  I  know  nothing  further  than  those  to 
whom  I  communicated  it  in  this  city  and 
those  who  came  from  a  distance. 

Q.  To  what  extent  did;  Dodd  state  that  he 
had  communicated  the  matter  ? 

A.  He  stated  to  me  that  I  was  the  only 
person  to  whom  he  had  communicated  it. 
That  was  about  the  2d  or  3d  of  August. 

Q.  Did  Mr.  Kerr  get  his  information  from 
the  same  source? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  do  not  know  where  he  got  it, 

Q.  Do  you  say  this  Council  of  Sixteen  had 
resolved  upon  this  revolutionary  scheme 
when  it  convened  at  Chicago? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.   How  long  before  that? 

A.  I  don't  think  he  told  me,  when  I  saw 


104 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


him  here  from  Chicago  or  New  York;  he 
got  back  about  the  29th  of  July. 

Q.  Did  you  not  know,  from  other  sources, 
and  through  other  medium,  that,  so  far 
from  Mr.  Dodd's  statement  being  true,  the 
proposition  had  actually  been  voted  down 
in  that  Council? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  heard  that. 

Q.  Did  you  hear  it  from  the  members  of 
the  order? 

A.  I  heard  it,  but  it  did  not  come  directly 
i'rorn  a  member  of  the  order. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  from  Dodd,  that  Bowles 
was  a  member  of  that  Council? 

A.  That  is  what  I  understood. 

Q.  Did  you  understand  from  Bowles,  as  a 
member  of  the  Council,  that  the  proposition 
for  revolution  had  been  voted  down? 

A.  Not  directly. 

Q.  Who  were  the  members  of  that  Coun 
cil?  Was  either  of  the  accused — Heffren, 
Horsey,  Milligan,or  Humphreys  a  member? 

A.  I  did  not  understand  that  either  of 
them  was. 

Q.  You  say  that  it  was  not  until  a  very 
late  period  of  your  connection  with  the  or 
der,  that  you  got  any  knowledge  of  its  mili 
tary  feature.  Did  it,  either  with  or  without 
its  military  feature,  contemplate  in  its 
teachings,  as  you  got  them  in  the  order,  or 
in  the  ritual,  or  any  of  its  written  or  un 
written  works,  any  such  revolutionary 
scheme  as  the  purpose  and  object  of  the 
order? 

A.  I  did  not  so  understand  it;  I  never 
read  the  Constitution  or  Ritual  until  long 
after  I  joined;  not  until  the  30th  of  July. 

Q.  What  was  the  purpose  of  the  organiza 
tion  as  you  understood  it? 

A.  Purely  political.  That  was  my  under 
standing  of  it  at  the  time  I  joined  it. 

Q.  This  conflict  of  the  Government,  then, 
that  was  concocted  by  these  men,  you  say 
was  not  within  the  scope  or  contemplation 
of  the  order? 

A.  Nothing  was  ever  mentioned  in  the 
order,  or  by  any  member  of  the  order,  until 
it  was  communicated  by  Dodd  to  me. 

Q,  Do  you  know  anything  about  the  Com 
mittee  of  Thirteen  ? 

A.  I  think  it  was  some  time  in  August, 
On  the  Saturday  that  these  arms  were  dis 
covered,  a  young  man  came  to  my  house 
after  supper,  and  brought  me  a  communica 
tion  from  Dodd  and  Walker.  I  think  they 
were  in  Chicago.  They  inclosed  an  address 
from  what  was  called  a  Committee  of  Thir 
teen,  and  requested  me  to  publish  it  in  the 
tientincl;  and  if  I  did  not  publish  it,  they 
wanted  to  have  it  printed  in  Dodd's  office. 
T  told  him  I  had  not  time  to  look  at  it,  but 
if  he  would  come  in  on  Sunday  morning,  I 
would  let  him  know.  I  declined  to  pub 
lish  it,  and  I  told  him  that  as  I  had  an  in 
terest  in  Dodd's  establishment,  it  could 
not  be  published  there.  I  inclosed  the 
communication  back  to  Mr.  Walker. 


Q.  You  say,  do  you  not,  that  Walker  said 
he  wrote  the  address,  and  was  authorized  to 
use  Dodd's  name  as  chairman  of  the  Com 
mittee  of  Thirteen? 

A.  I  understand  there  was  no  such  com 
mittee. 

Q.  Had  you  any  evidence  that  Walker 
signed  the  communication.? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  It  was  in  his  handwriting. 
Dodd  also  wrote  to  the  same  effect  from 
Chicago. . 

Q.  Had  you  any  more  than  one  conversa 
tion  with  Heffren? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  Heffren  came  to  my  office 
several  times;  the  night  before  and  the 
night  after  the  meeting  on  the  16th  and 
17th  of  February. 

Q.  Was  it  on  that  occasion  you  said  you 
would  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  order? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  and  Heffren  said  he  con 
sidered  it  a  humbug. 

Q.  Did  he  express  any  opinion  about 
abandoning  it  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  so  understood  him.  He 
coincided  with  my  opinion  and  would  do  as 
I  had  done. 

Q.  Did  you  have  any  information  of  Mr. 
Heffren' s  meeting  with  the  organization 
after  that  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  stated,  did  you  not,  that  Mr.  Milli- 
gan  was  present  at  the  State  Council  in  No 
vember  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Was  that  the  only  time  you  met  him 
at  the  State  Council  ? 

A.  I  met  him  only  that  time,  and  that 
was  the  only  knowledge  I  had  of  his  con 
nection  .with  the  order. 

Q.  Have  you  not  stated  that  nothing  was 
discussed  in  the  order  but  pure  politics, 
education  and  literature  ? 

A.  That  was  all  that  was  discussed  in  my 
hearing.  There  may  have  been  other  mat 
ters  that  1  did  not  hear. 

Q.  What  was  the  date  of  the  time  when 
you  expressed  your  determination  not  to 
have  any  more  to  do  with  the  institu 
tion? 

A.  It  was  after  the  February  meeting. 

Q.  Did  you  not  after  that  time  maintain 
your  previous  intimacy  with  members  or 
persons  belonging  to  the  organization? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  From  October  until  the  15th  of  Au 
gust,  when  Dodd  revealed  to  you  the  pur 
pose  to  inaugurate  a  revolution,  did  you 
hear,  in  or  out  of  the  order,  of  any  purpose 
to  inaugurate  a  revolution  by  the  order 
itself? 

A.  Nothing  of  the  kind. 

Q.  Then  what  was  the  organization?  Was 
it  not  purely  political  ? 

A.  That  was  my  understanding. 

Q.  Then  I  will  ask  you  to  state  whether 
this  conspiracy  that  Dodd  revealed  to  you 
was  not  a  conspiracy  of  Dodd,  Walker  and 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


105 


one  or  two  others,  and  not  a  conspiracy  by 
the  order  ? 
A.  That  was  my  understanding,  sir. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate : 

Bo  you  say  that  was  your  understand 
ing? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  AVas  it  not  your  understanding  that 
the  leaders  of  the  order  were  to  use  the  or 
der  to  accomplish  this  revolution?  What 
position  did  Dodd  hold  in  the  command  of 
the  order  ? 

A.  He  was  Grand  Commander. 

Q.  Had  he  not,  according  to  the  Consti 
tution  and  Ritual,  the  power  to  call  it  to 
gether  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Were  they  not  sworn  to  obey  implicit 
ly  his  order  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Then  could  he,  or  could  he  not,  order 
them  to  come  here  armed,  as  he  chose, 
Was  that  not  in  accordance  with  the  obli 
gations  of  the  order? 

A.  It  was  not  so  far  as  I  understood  it. 

Q.  I  ask  you  the  plain,  simple  question, 
whether  or  not,  according  to  the  Consti 
tution  of  that  order,  you  were  not  to  obey 
him  implicitly  over  and  above  all  other 
commands  ?  Did  you  ever  see  the  consti 
tution  and  laws  of  the  order? 

A.  T  saw  them  as  they  were  published  in 
the  Indianapolis  Journal.  I  saw  the  book 
containing  them,  but  never  read  it? 

Q.  Would  you  recognize  them  if  you  saw 
the  books? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  think  I  should 

Q.  The  Judge  Advocate  here  handed  the 
witness  a  copy  of  the  Constitution  of  the 
Supreme  Council  of  the  order,  and  asked, 
is  this  one  of  the  books  you  saw  ? 

A.  It  looks  something  like  it. 

Q.  Will  you  read  section  17  of  the  Gen 
eral  Laws? 

A.  The  witness  read  the  following: 

"See.  17.  The  Grand  Commanders  shall 
be  the  presiding  officers  of  the  Grand  Coun 
cils  of  the  States,  execute  all  laws  passed 
by  such  Councils,  and  shall  be  commanders- 
in-chief  of  the  military  forces  of  their  re- 
ipective  States." 

What  I  saw  was  the  ritual  and  the  oath ; 
I  never  saw  this  before. 

The  Judge  Advocate  here  handed  the 
witness  a  pamphlet  containing  the  Ritual 
of  the  third  degree,  and  asked : 

Q.  Is  that  not  the  Ritual  of  the  third  de 
gree? 

A.  That  is  what  it  purports  to  be. 

The  Judge  Advocate  then  read  the  fol 
lowing  portion  of  the  obligation: 

"I  do  further  swear,  that  I  will,  at  all 
times  arid  in  all  places,  yield  prompt  and 
implicit  obedience  to  the  utmost  of  my 
ability  without  remonstrance,  hesitation  or 


delay,  to  any  and  everj^  mandate,  order  or 
request,  of  my  immediate  M.  E.  G.  C.,*  in 
all  things  touching  the  purposes  of  the  O. 
S.  LM  and  to  defend  the  principles  thereof, 
when  assailed  in  my  own  State  or  country, 
in  whatsoever  capacity  may  be  assigned  to 
me  by  authority  of  our  order." 

Q.  Is  that  one  of  the  obligations  taken 
by  the  order  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  I  will  ask  you  again,  whether  the 
Grand  Commander  had  power  to  call  this 
order  together,  and  to  give  them  such  or 
ders  as  he  suw  proper? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  That  matter  came  up  for 
discussion,  I  think.  I  asked  the  Grand 
Commander  the  question,  when  I  went  into 
the  order,  whether  there  was  any  obliga 
tion  that  would  violate  my  duties  or  my 
obligations  as  a  citizen,  and  he  said  there 
was  not.  I  think  that  was  the  construc 
tion  placed  upon  this  obligation  :  that  there 
would  be  nothing  violating  our  obligation 
as  citizens. 

Q.  You  have  spoken  of  this  uprising  on 
the  16th.  By  whom  was  it  contempla 
ted? 

A.  Dodd  gave  me  no  information  but 
this,  that  he  desired  me  to  call  a  mass 
meeting  of  the  Democracy,  and  under 
cover  of  that  he  could  accomplish  hia 
ends. 

Q.  How? 

A.  By  revolution. 

Q.  Who  were  to  inaugurate  that  revolu 
tion? 

A.  He  expected  the  men  that  came  here 
to  do  it. 

Q.  Who  were  to  come  here? 

A.  That  he  never  explained  to  me. 

Q.  Who,  did  you  gather  from  what  he 
said,  would  do  it? 

A.  I  should  infer  from  what  he  said  that 
he  expected  the  assistance  of  the  members 
of  the  order. 

Q.  Were  any  promises  or  pledges,  or 
threats  made,  on  behalf  of  the  Govern 
ment,  to  induce  you  to  give  this  testimony? 

A.   None  whatever. 

I  think  it  is  due  to  this  Court  and  to  the 
Judge  Advocate,  to  state  that  this  state 
ment  is  made  voluntarily.  That  I  intended 
to  have  made  it  in  writing  and  publish  it 
for  my  own  vindication. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
at  2  o'clock,  P.  M. 


AFTERNOON   SESSION. 

COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,        ) 
October  23,  1SG4,  2  o'clock,  P.  M.  j 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  ad 
journment. 

All  the  members  present;  also,  the  Judge 
Advocate,  the  accused  and  their  counsel 


*  Most  Excellent  Grand  Commander. 


106 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


Felix  G.  Stidger,  a  witness  for  the  Gov 
ernment,  was  then  introduced,  and  being 
duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testi 
fied  as  follows: 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate : 

State  your  name,  place  of  residence,  and 
business  for  the  last  two  or  three  years  ? 

Answer.  Felix  G.  Stidger;  I  live  in  Mat- 
toon,  Illinois.  For  the  last  two  or  three 
years  I  have  been  in  the  dry  goods  business, 
and  I  have  been  a  carpenter,  and  served  in 
the  army. 

Q.  Where  did  you  reside  immediately  pre 
ceding  your  living  at  Mattoon,  Illinois  ? 

A.  At  Louisville,  Kentucky.  I  came  there 
on  the  15th  of  April,  1864. 

Q.  Where  previous  to  that? 

A.  At  Taylorsville,  Kentucky. 

Q.  How  long  did  you  reside  there  ? 

A.  Two  months  after  leaving  the   army. 

Q.  When  did  you  leave  the  army  ? 

A.  On  the  morning  of  the  14th  of  Feb 
ruary  I  received  my  discharge. 

Q.  From  what  regiment  were  you  dis 
charged? 

A.  From  the  15th  Regiment  Kentucky 
Volunteer  Infantry.  I  was  discharged  for 
physical  disability. 

Q.  Were  you  with  your  regiment  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  not  a  day.  I  served  as  clerk 
in  the  Adjutant  General's  office,  1st  Divis 
ion,  14th  Army  Corps. 

Q.  Who  was  the  Adjutant  General? 

A.  Major  McDowell,  Captain  Taylor,  now 
Colonel  15th  Kentucky  Volunteers,  Captain 
Nevin,  Lieutenant  Colonel  Lyme  Starling 
formerly  chief  of  General  Crittenden's 
staff,  and  when  I  left  Captain  Wells  was 
Assistant  Adjutant  General. 

Q.  Who  commanded  the  corps? 

A.  General  Thomas,  and  part  of  the  time 
General  Palmer. 

Q,  What  particular  duties  did  you  per 
form  as  clerk  ? 

A.  Applications  for  resignations,  leave  of 
absence,  furloughs,  sometimes  reports  of 
the  troops,  and  special  and  general  orders. 

Q.  Please  state  to  the  Court  how  your 
attention  was  first  called  to  the  Order  of 
the  Sons  of  Liberty;  and  when,  if  ever, 
you  joined  them? 


Q.  Did  you  go  directly  to  his  house? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  stopped  at  Salem,  thinking 
that  was  the  nearest  railroad  point,  but 
I  found  it  was  twenty  odd  miles  to  French 
Lick  Springs,  and  no  regular  conveyance. 
By  going  further  up  the  railroad  to  Orleans, 
it  was  not  so  far;  there  was  a  regular  con 


veyance  all  the   time, 
train  at  Salem  about  11 


I   stepped    off  the 
in  the  morning  of 


the  6th  of  May,  and  remained  there  until 
the  night  train  came  along,  which  was 
probably  10  o'clock;  I  then  went  to  Orleans 
and  staid  there  till  12  o'clock  the  next  day, 
Saturday  the  7th.  when  I  took  the  regular 
conveyance  out  to  Paoli.  On  the  8th  I  went 
to  Dr.  Bowies'  house.  On  the  way  to  Mr. 
Bowies',  I  saw  Mr.  Heffren  at  Salem. 

Q.  State  how  you  happened  to  meet  him, 
and  your  conversation  with  him. 

A.  I  fell  in  with  a  man  by  the  name  of 
Drom.  I  think  he  stated  his  name  was 
John,  but  I  am  not  sure  whether  it  was 
John  or  S.  He  is  a  clothing  merchant, 
and  keeps  a  store.  He  saw  Mr.  Heffren 
walking  across  the  square,  and  remarked 
that  there  was  one  of  the  Democratic  lead 
ers  of  that  part  of  the  country.  He  said 
something  about  Heffren  wearing  a  butter 
nut  pin,  and  that  there  had  been  something 
said  about  taking  it  off  him,  and  that  if 
it  had  been  done  there  would  have  been 
one  thousand  or  fifteen  hundred  men  ready 
to  revenge  the  insult.  Drom  told  Heffren 
that  I  was  from  Kentucky;  Ileffren  came 
up  and  asked  if  I  wished  to  see  him.  He 
then  went  on  to  tell  me  that  he  was  ex 
pecting  a  commissioner  from  Kentucky, 
from  the  rebel  forces  there;  and  I  told  him 
about  three  of  Forrest's  regiments  being 
disbanded  there — in  the  State  of  Ken 
tucky. 

Q.  Did  he  explain  what  he  meant  by  the 
word  "commissioner?" 

A.  Not  at  that  time;  afterward  he  did. 
I  told  him  of  the  three  regiments  of  For 
rest's  men  having  been  disbanded,  and  he 
told  me  that  there  were  four  more  to  be 
disbanded.  This  was  what  ho  was  expect 
ing  to  hear  of,  and  was  expecting  a  com 
missioner  from  the  forces  in  Kentucky  to 
see  him  that  day  or  the  next,  and  he  did 


A.  I  was  in  Captain  Jones'  office  on  the  not  know  but  I  was  probably  the  man,  as  I 

came  from  Kentucky.  I  knew  nothing 
more  about  these  three  Kentucky  regi 
ments  being  disbanded  than  what  I  had 
seen  in  the  newspapers.  I  understood  they 
were  furloughed  soldiers  who  were  to  re 
main  at  home  a  certain  time,  and  at  a  cer 
tain  signal  they  were  to  concentrate  when 
ever  ordered.  Mr.  Heffren  told  me  during 
the  evening  that  he  could  call  together, 
within  twenty-four  hours,  from  one  thou 
sand  to  fifteen  hundred  armed  men  in  that 
section,  in  connection  with  that  secret  or 
ganization.  He  did  not  say  particularly 
for  what  purpose  he  could  call  them.  He 
asked  me  if  I  knew  any  thing  about  the 


morning  of  the  5th  of  May,  1864,  and  he 
showed  me  a  letter  from  General  Carring- 
ton,  stating  something  in  reference  to  Dr. 
Bowles  being  a  dangerous  man,  and  re 
questing  him  to  send  a  Kentuckian  to  him; 
on  the  receipt  of  that  letter,  Captain  Jones 
sent  me  to  Dr.  Bowles.  I  received  instruc 
tions  in  the  Vestibule,  or  Neophyte  Degree, 
on  that  morning;  Mr.  Prentice  instructed 
me  before  I  went  to  see  Dr.  Bowles.  That 
was  on  the  5th  of  May,  1864.  1  started  to 
see  Dr.  Bowles  on  the  morning  of  the  6th, 
and  arrived  at  his  house  on  the  8th.  He  re 
sides  at  French  Lick  Springs,  Orange  coun 
ty,  Indiana. 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


107 


Democratic  organization;  I  said  I  was  a 
member  of  the  first  degree  of  it.  He  did 
not  mention  the  name  of  the  order. 

Q.  What  further  conversation  had  you 
with  Hetfren? 

A.  1  had  no  particular  conversation  with 
him  that  evening;  he  promised  to  see  me 
after  supper;  but  his  wifo  being  ill,  he  did 
not  come. 

Q.  Did  you  state  your  name  and  business 
to  him? 

A.  I  believe  I  told  him  my  name  was 
Grundy,  but  1  did  not  state  my  business  at 
all. 

Q.  What  time  did  you  leave  him  ? 

A.  I  suppose  it  was  about  sundown  when 
he  left  me  to  go  home.  He  warned  me  of  some 
twoorthreegentlemenwhom  hepointed  out; 
one  was  Joe  Faulkner;  that  I  must  be  par 
ticular  about  what  I  said ;  for  he  told  me  he 
was  a  United  States  Detective.  lie  also  re 
ferred  me  to  the  Persise  House  as  being  of 
a  different  stripe  to  the  one  I  was  stopping 
at,  which  was  known  as  a  Union  House. 
He  remarked  to  a  gentleman  that  evening, 
or  a  gentleman  asked  him  why  a  certain 
lady  was  sent  from  Kentucky;  he  said  he 
didn't  know  why  it  was,  except  that  they 
expected  trouble  in  Kentucky,  and  that  this 
would  be  a  safer  place.  He  also  said,  that 
if  Lee  succeeded  in  permanently  holding 
Pennsylvania,  and  some  one  else  some  other 
point,  as  he  understood  it — "things  would 
be  different." 

Q.  W7hat  "things"  did  he  refer  to? 

A.  I  suppose  he  meant  the  workings  of 
the  Government.  I  left  him  that  night  and 
went  to  Orleans? 

Q.  When  did  you  see  Dr.  Bowles  ? 

A.  I  went  there  Sunday  morning ;  got 
there  about  10  or  11  o'clock.  He  was  from 
home,  and  did  not  return  till  6  or  7  in  the 
evening.  His  wife  gave  me  an  introduction 
to  him.  My  name  was  given  as  J.  J.  Grundy. 
1  gave  this  name  to  Mr.  Banning,  the  keeper 
of  the  house,  and  he  so  registered  it.  My 
first  conversation  with  Bowles  was  on  Mon 
day  evening.  He  asked  me  if  I  knew  any 
thing  about  the  Democratic  organization. 
I  told  him  I  was  a  member  of  the  first  de- 

fee  of  it.  He  did  not  test  me  as  to  whether 
was  a  member.  He  told  me  I  was  sur 
rounded  by  members  of  that  order.  He 
told  me  that  he  was  a  military  chief  of  the 
order,  and  that  a  man  by  the  name  of 
Wright,  of  St.  Louis,  was  the  civil  chief,  and 
that  the  order  was  numerous.  He  gave  me 
the  name  of  Mr.  Halloway.  and  said  he  was 
the  only  man  in  Illinois  that  he  could  put 
his  finger  on  with  reliability.  He  said  the 
forces  of  Indiana  would  concentrate  in  Ken 
tucky,  and  make  Kentucky  their  battle 
ground ;  that  the  forces  in  Illinois  would 
concentrate  in  St.  Louis,  and  co-operate 
with  the  forces  in  Missouri;  that  Illinois 
would  furnish  50,000,  Missouri  30,000,  and 
Price  was  to  invade  the  State  with  20,000 


men;  with  that  100,000  men  they  were  to 
hold  and  permanently  occupy  that  State, 
and  the  troops  of  Indiana  and  Ohio  concen 
trate  at  Louisville.  I  also  heard  him  speak 
of  a  man  by  the  name  of  Stone ;  who  said 
he  had  organized  a  regiment  of  men  in  six 
weeks  in  this  State,  (Indiana,)  and  that  he 
expected  him  to  raise  another  regiment. 
He  spoke  of  another  man  named  Dickerson, 
who  went  to  Richmond  at  his  pleasure.  He 
lived  in  Baltimore.  He  wanted  to  know 
how  many  men  Kentucky  could  fur 
nish,  and  stated  that  a  rebel  force  under 
Buckner  would  come  into  the  eastern  part 
of  the  State,  and  with  these  forces  they  in 
tended  to  hold  Kentucky.  At  that  time 
no  time  had  been  set  for  the  movement. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  from  him,  or  not,  that 
this  organization,  or  secret  order,  was  to  act 
in  conjunction  with  the  rebel  forces? 

A.  They  were.  He  told  me  that  this 
order  was  made  out  of  the  Knights  of  the 
Golden  Circle,  of  which  he  had  been  a  mem 
ber,  and  that  he  resurrected  this  order  out 
of  it.  He  appeared  to  claim  a  great  deal  of 
credit. 

Q.  Was  any  thing  else  said  at  that  meet 
ing  between  you  and  Bowles  ? 

A.  These  were  the  important  parts. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  afterward  ? 

A.  I  went  back  to  Kentucky.  He  was 
anxious  I  should  use  all  my  exertions  in  ex 
tending  the  order  as  much  as  possible. 
Bowles  told  me  there  was  to  be  a  meeting  in 
Indianapolis  in  about  two  weeks  from  then ; 
and  said  he  would  get  other  reports  from 
Kentucky,  but  he  wanted  me  to  go  to  Ken 
tucky  and  see  what  could  be  done;  he  was 
anxious  to  know  what  he  could  report  at  that 
meeting. 

I  arrived  at  Dr.  Bowies'  on  the  8th  of  May, 
1864;  stayed  at  his  house  four  days,  and  re 
turned  to  Kentucky  about  the  12th  or  loth 
of  May. 

Q.  Who  did  you  see  upon  your  return 
that  was  connected  with  this  order  ? 

A.  Dr.  Kalfus  was  the  only  one  I  knew 
to  be  connected  with  it.  I  had  some  talk 
with  him,  and  he  further  initiated  me  into 
the  order. 

Q.  What  degrees  did  you  receive  from 
him? 

A.  He  gave  me  the  first  degree.  I  had 
previously  taken  only  the  Vestibule  degree. 

Q.  Did  you  meet  Judge  Bullitt,  of  Ken 
tucky? 

A.  Not  until  after  the  second  interview 
with  Bowles.  I  startedfrom  Louisville  about 
two  weeks  after  my  return  from  Bowies', 
probably  on  the  24th  or  25th  of  May.  1  did 
not  go  direct  to  Dr.  Bowles,  but  stopped  at 
Salem  to  see  Heffren.  I  saw  him  and  had 
some  talk  with  him.  He  told  mo  he  had 
been  to  Indianapolis,  and  had  seen  Mr.  11.  H. 
Dodd,  and  that  they  had  concluded  to  call  a 
meeting  of  the  organization  some  day  be 
tween  the  13th  and  16th  of  Juno.  He  said 


108 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


they  were  the  only  two  men  in  the  State 
who  had  the  power  to  call  that  meeting; 
that  was  himself  (Heffren)  and  Dodd;  and 
that  the  organization  of  the  State  was  now 
about  complete  ;  that  it  would  number  be 
tween  75,000  and  80,000  men. 

Q.  Did  you  register  your  name  at  Salem  ? 

A.  If  I  did,  it  was  as  J.  J.  Grundy. 

Q.  Where  did  you  have  this  talk  with 
Heffren? 

A.  It  was  in  the  sitting-room  of  the  Per- 
sise  House,  on  or  about  the  25th  of  May. 

Q.  How  are  you  enabled  to  fix  that  date? 

A.  By  its  being  on  Wednesday,  near  two 
weeks  after  my  return  from  seeing  Dr. 
Bowles  the  first  time. 

Q.  Did  you  make  any  report  of  your  visit 
at  that  time  ? 

A.  I  made  my  report  to  Captain  Jones,  and 
I  understand  he  sent  it  to  General  Burbridge. 

Q.  State  the  particulars  of  your  second 
visit  to  Dr.  Bowles  ? 

A.  I  left  Salem  about  11  o'clock  in  the 
morning,  and  arrived  at  Dr.  Bowies'  that 
evening.  He  was  not  at  home.  That  was 
on  Wednesday.  He  returned  Saturday,  at 
noon.  At  his  home  no  one  appeared  to 
know  where  he  had  gone.  He  told  me  him 
self,  that  he  had  been  to  Indianapolis ;  had 
seen  Mr.  Dodd,  Mr.  Barrett,  of  Missouri, 
Judge  Bullitt,  and  some  other  gentlemen; 
and  that  there  would  be  a  meeting  of  the 
Grand  Council  on  the  14th  of  June.  He 
told  me  that  Barrett  pledged  from  Missouri 
30,000  men,  and  that  Illinois  pledged  50,000. 
The  leaders  of  those  States  pledged  that 
number  of  men.  The  forces  of  Illinois  and 
Missouri  were  to  co-operate  with  Price.  He 
said  that  20,000  men  or  more,  if  Jeff  Davis 
could  spare  them,  were  to  be  sent  into  Mis 
souri.  He  told  me,  also,  that  Indiana 
pledged  40,000,  which  were  to  co-operate 
with  those  from  Ohio,  concentrate  near  Lou 
isville,  and  co-operate  with  whatever  troops 
Jeff  Davis  could  send  into  Kentucky  under 
Buckner  or  Breckinriclge;  or,  if  he  thought 
it  advisable,  he  would  send  Longstreet  with 
them.  They  had  no  regular  communication 
with  Ohio,  but  had  made  arrangements  to 
open  up  regular  communication  with  their 
friends  there.  He  also  told  me  of  the 
change  in  the  Supreme  Commander  to  Val- 
landigham,  and  that  he  had  been  appointed 
a  commissioner  to  visit  Vallandigham  in 
Canada. 

Q.  What  further  conversation  had  you 
with  Dr.  Bowles,  at  that  time  ? 

A.  He  told  me  that  on  the  Sunday  which 
was  the  22d  of  May,  that  himself,  Mr.  Dodd, 
and  a  Dutch  chemist,  whom  he  had  known 
for  years,  and  a  number  of  other  men,  while 
people  thought  they  were  at  church,  were 
in  a  basement,  experimenting  with  Greek 
fire,  which  they  had  now  brought  to  perfec 
tion,  through  this  Dutch  chemist;  that  they 
intended  to  use  it  for  the  destruction  of 
Government  property  ;  that  the  Jeff  Davis 


Government  was  to  pay  them  ten  per  cent 
for  all  the  property  destroyed,  taking  the 
estimate,  as  given  in  the  Northern  papers, 
of  the  amount  destroyed.  He  also  told  me 
that  the  two  boats  burned  at  the  Louisville 
wharf  last  spring,  and  boats  belonging  to 
the  Government  that  had  been  destroyed 
on  the  Mississippi  river,  and  elsewhere,  had 
been  burned  by  this  Greek  fire. 

Q.  Did  he  then,  or  at  any  other  time, 
show  you  an  instrument  that  would  be  used 
for  that  purpose? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  he  did. 

A  conical  shell  was  here  handed  to  tha 
witness.  [See  Illustrations.] 

Q.  Have  you  ever  seen  this  or  a  similar 
instrument? 

A.  I  saw  a  shell  similar  to  this,  at  Mi\ 
Booking's  ^room,  at  the  Louisville  Hotel, 
Louisville. 

Q.  Who  were  present  ? 

A.  Dr.   Bowles,    Booking,    Kalfus,    Boyd,    * 
Winchester,  Miller,  and  a  number  of  others. 

Q.  Were  they  members  of  the  order  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  may  explain  how  the  shell  works. 

A.  The  space  between  the  innermost 
cast  and  the  inner  shell  was  to  be  filled 
with  liquid  Greek  fire.  The  space  between 
the  inner  and  outer  shell  is  designed  to  giva 
room  for  the  inner  shell  to  easily  move  so  as 
to  strike  the  percussion  cap,  when  projec- 
ted  from  a  gun,  at  the  moment  of  striking 
an  object,  igniting  the  powder  and  bursting 
the  shell.  At  the  same  time  the  Greek  fire 
is  ignited. 

A  spherical  shell  was  here  handed  to  the 
witness.  [See  Illustrations.] 

Q.  Was  there  a  weapon  similar  to  thia 
shown  you  by  Booking? 

A.  Booking  had  none  of  them  at  that 
time,  but  he  drew  a  diagram  of  them,  and 
explained  the  principle  01  their  action  to 
them. 

Q.  You  may  describe  its  mode  of  action?    / 

A.  The  glass  vial  inside  of  the  inner  shell 
contains  Greek  fire,  and  after  it  is  placed  in 
the  inner  shell,  is  surrounded  with  powder. 
The  inner  shell  is  capped  with  percussion  caps 
placed  on  the  nipples,  which  are  so  arranged 
that  at  the  moment  it  strikes,  the  three  cap* 
will  be  exploded,  no  matter  how  it  falls,  it 
could  be  thrown  by  the  hand,  and  on  strik 
ing  any  thing  the  caps  would  burst,  igniting 
the  powder  and  bursting  the  shell. 

Booking,  who  had  some  of  the  Greek  fire 
and  experimented  with  it,  also  said  that  tha 
liquid  fire  if  thrown  in  a  vial  would  burn 
any  thing  against  which  it  was  thrown.  He 
also  explained  a  kind  of  clock  machine, 
which,  being  wound  up,  would  run  a  certain 
length  of  time,  and  at  that  point  would 
in  some  way  ignite  the  Greek  fire,  and  a  con 
flagration  would  be  the  result.  He  did  not 
have  one  of  these  machines,  but  said  h« 
could  make  them  for  -the  benefit  of  the 
Order  of  Sons  of  Liberty.  He  also  showed 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


109 


the  muster  roll  of  a  battery,  which  he  said 
he  had  been  authorized  to  raise,  and  this 
muster  roll  exhibited  nothing  but  a  list  of  the 
rebel  prisoners  confined  in  one  of  the  prisons 
of  the  United  States,  and  he  said  that  every 
one  of  those  enlisted  in  his  battery,  were 
enlisted  with  the  understanding  that  at  the 
first  opportunity  they  were  to  desert  to  the 
enemy,  and  that  one  section  had  deserted 
and  taken  over  two  of  the  guns.  This  was 
said  in  the  presence  of  Dr.  Bowles. 

Q.  When  was  this  meeting  held? 

A.  On  the  28th  of  June,  at  Louisville,  in 
Booking's  room. 

Q.  State  what  took  place  in  the  interview 
with  Dr.  Bowles  on  the  26th  of  May.  What 
did  he  say  in  that  interview  about  Greek 
fire? 

A.  He  said  they  had  been  experimenting, 
and  had  got  it  about  perfect ;  that  Bullitt 
knew  how  it  was  made;  that  he  wished  me 
to  go  home  and  get  the  order  organized  and 
spread  over  the  State,  and  he  wanted  me  to 
impress  upon  the  people  the  idea  of  this 
Greek  fire,  that  they  would  thereby  come 
more  readily  into  the  order.  He  was  anxi 
ous  I  should  make  Judge  Bullitt's  acquaint 
ance,  and  assist  him  all  I  could.  From  Dr. 
Bowles  I  went  back  to  Louisville,  and 
carried  a  message  to  Judge  Bullitt.  He 
told  me  to  make  Bullitt's  acquaintance,  and 
say  to  him  that  he  had  seen  Mr.  Andrew 
Humphreys  since  their  meeting  in  Indian 
apolis,  and  Mr.  Humphreys  had  agreed  to 
take  the  position  of  a  brigadier  general  and 
charge  of  the  forces  in  the  rear  in  case  of 
an  uprising  of  the  order. 

Q.  Did  you  not  speak  of  Heffren  as  the 
person  you  saw  at  Salem  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Can  you  identify  him  as  one  of  the  ac 
cused  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

[The  witness  here  pointed  to  the  accused, 
Horace  Heftren.] 

Q.  Is  that  the  same  man  with  whom  you 
had  the  conversation  at  Salem  ? 

A.   It  is,  sir. 

Q.  You  stated,  did  you  not,  that  Hum 
phreys  would  take  charge  of  the  forces  in 
tho  rear? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  But  Bowles  did  not  say  what 
they  were  to  do.  We  were  talking  of  the 
order,  and  I  suppose  he  meant  the  forces 
comprised  all  the  members  of  the  order. 

Q.  Did  you  see  Judge  Bullitt? 

A.  I  did. 

Q.  Was  he  a  member  of  the  order  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  he  was. 

Q.  You  may  state  what  was  done  and 
said  in  your  interview  with  Judge  Bullitt. 

A.  I  made  his  acquaintance,  and  told  him 
what  Bowles  had  told  me  to  tell  him.  He 
said  it  suited  him  exactly,  that  Humphreys 
was  willing  to  take  that  position. 

Q.  What  position  did  he  refer  to? 

A.  It  seoms  that  Humphreys  had   been 


known  as  a  Major  General  in  the  order. 
Bullitt  said:  "I  have  spent  a  good  deal  of 
money  in  this  affair,  and  I  am  willing  to 
spend  every  cent  I  have;  for  I  hope  soon  to 
be  able  to  steal  a  good  living  from  tnese 
damned  sons  of  bitches." 

Q.  What  official  position  did  Bullitt  hold 
at  that  time? 

A.  He  was  one  of  the  Judges  of  the  Su 
preme  Court  of  Appeals  of  tho  State  of 
Kentucky. 

Q.  Had  you  any  further  conversation  ? 

A.  Not  until  a  day  or  two  afterward. 
There  were  Judge  Bullitt,  Dr.  Chambers,  of 
Gallatin  county,  Mr.  Kalfus,  D.  C.  Whips, 
Mr.  Piper,  of  Springfield,  Illinois,  and  my 
self,  in  Kalfus'  office — in  his  private  room. 
Chambers  had  just  come  down  from  Gal 
latin  county,  for  the  purpose  of  getting  in 
struction  in  the  work  of  organizing  his 
county;  there  was  something  said  about  a 
man  by  the  name  of  Coffin  having  been 
in  the  room  with  Dr.  Bowles  and  others 
in  this  city.  Chambers  said  he  knew  Cof 
fin,  that  he  was  a  United  States  Detective, 
and  called  him  a  good  many  hard  names; 
he  knew  he  was  a  United  States  Detective, 
he  had  been  a  stanch  Union  man — and 
that  was  the  only  evidence  he  had  of  his 
being  a  United  States  Detective.  After 
talking  the  matter  over,  they  decided  he 
should  be  murdered.  Dr.  Bowles  had  been 
instrumental  in  getting  him  into  the  order, 
and  they  thought  that  Bowles  ought  to  be 
instrumental  in  getting  him  out.  They  de 
termined  to  put  him  out  of  the  way ;  he 
was  a  United  States  Detective,  and  he 
should  be  murdered  at  all  hazards.  They 
sent  me  with  these  instructions  to  Bowles, 
and  I  was  to  go  to  Indianapolis  and  get 
some  constitutions  of  the  order,  and  I  was 
to  inform  Dodd,  and  whoever  I  might  see, 
to  be  on  their  guard,  and  do  all  they  could 
to  get  shut  of  him. 

Q.  Who  sent  you? 

A.  It  was  with  the  unanimous  consent  of 
all  parties  that  I  was  sent. 

Q.  Who  were  they? 

A.  Judge  Bullitt,  Mr.  Piper,  Dr.  Cham 
bers,  Dr.  Kalfus,  and  D.  C.  Whips;  they 
gave  me  that  message  to  Dr.  Bowles;  I 
started  on  the  next  day,  which  was  about 
the  first  day  of  June,  and  took  the  message 
to  Dr.  Bowles.  I  saw  him  that  same  eve 
ning. 

Q.  What  did  you  say  to  him  ? 

A.  I  told  him  what  was  the  decision  of 
Judge  Bullitt  and  others  in  Louisville;  that 
Coffin  was  unquestionably  a  United  State? 
Detective;  and  that  as  he  had  been  instru 
mental  in  getting  him  into  the  order,  he 
ought  to  be  instrumental  in  getting  him 
out.  He  said  he  knew  that  two  men  at 
the  Shoals  had  initiated  Mr.  Coffin,  and  he 
knew  he  had  been  in  the  United  States 
employ,  but  he  could  explain  that  to  their 
satisfaction.  "  But,"  he  said,  "  I  will  put  two 


110 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


men  on  his  track."  He  gave  me  their  sur 
names,  but  I  do  not  remember  them.  He 
told  me  to  say  that  he  would  put  two  men 
on  his  track.  He  did  not  seem  to  think 
Coffin  was  a  dangerous  man  at  all. 

Q,  Where  did  you  go  after  that  inter 
view? 

A.  To  Indianapolis. 

Q,  Had  you  any  further  conversation 
with  Bowles? 

A.  I  revealed  to  him  my  true  name,  and 
explained  to  him  why  I  had  come  to  him 
under  an  assumed  name.  I  told  him  that 
when  I  came  to  Louisville,  I  had  been 
watched  on  the  streets  by  a  United  States 
Detective — which  was  true — and  to  avoid 
being  troubled  by  that  man  I  had  to  go 
somewhere  else,  and  that  I  had  come  to 
his  house  to  escape  him,  and  that  was  the 
reason  why  I  had  come  to  his  house  under 
an  assumed  name. 

Q.  At  that  time  did  you  hold  any  office? 
If  so,  what? 

A.  Not  until  the  first  of  June.  From  Dr. 
Bowies'  I  went  to  Indianapolis  and  saw  Mr. 
Dodd  and  Mr.  Harrison.  I  also  received 
an  introduction  to  Mr.  Bingham  and  Dr. 
Gatling.  The  first  man  I  saw  to  whom  I 
made  myself  known  was  Mr.  Dodd.  I 
stopped  at  the  Palmer  House  and  register 
ed  under  my  real  name,  Felix  G.  Stidger. 
It  was  on  the  first  Saturday  in  June  that  I 
arrived  here. 

Q.  Where  did  you  see  Dodd? 

A.  Judge  Bullitt  directed  me  how  to  go 
from  that  house  to  Dodd's  building  that  I 
might  be  able  to  find  it  without  inquiring 
of  any  one,  and  creating  suspicion.  I  went 
there,  but  did  not  find  him.  I  inquired 
where  he  lived,  and  went  out  to  his  house. 
I  was  told  there  he  had  gone  down  town, 
and  that  I  would  probably  find  him  at 
Bingham's  office.  I  went  to  Mr.  Bingham's 
office  and  found  him  there.  I  gave  him  the 
letter  of  introduction  from  Judge  Bullitt; 
and  Mr.  Dodd  then  called  out  to  Mr.  Bing 
ham  and  Dr.  Gatling  and  gave  my  intro 
duction  to  them.  Mr.  Dodd  invited  me 
and  Dr.  Gatling  to  go  up  to  his  office. 

Q.  What  passed  between  you  and  Dodd 
at  his  office? 

A.  I  told  him  that  he  had  neglected  to 
put  up  the  constitutions  in  the  books  Bul 
litt  had  brought.  I  also  spoke  about  Coffin, 
and  said  that  Bowles  would  put  two  men 
on  his  track,  but  I  had  forgotten  their 
names.  Gatling  came  up  in  the  office  dur 
ing  the  time  I  was  there,  but  I  do  not  re 
member  whether  he  was  present' at  the 
time  or  not. 

Q.  What  else  occurred? 

A.  Dodd  went  with  me  to  Harrison's 
house,  and  he  inquired  of  some  persons  in 
the  building  if  they  knew  where  Mr.  Har 
rison  lived.  Some  one  told  him  where  he 
lived,  and  we  went  out  to  Harrison's  house. 
He  showed  him  my  letter  of  introduction 


from  Bullitt,  and  said  that  I  would  like  to 
see  him  at  his  office  in  the  evening.  I  saw 
him  at  his  office  in  the  evening,  and  had 
some  conversation  with  him.  He  gave 
me  the  rituals  and  constitution  of  the  or 
der,  and  the  address  of  the  Grand  Com 
mander  of  the  State  of  Indiana,  delivered 
on  the  16th  or  17th  of  February,  and  also 
instructed  me  in  the  third  degree  of  the  or 
der;  I  never  took  the  obligation,  but  he  in 
structed  me  in  it. 

Q.  Did  you  receive  any  money  from  mem 
bers  of  the  order  ? 

A.  Judge  Bullitt  gave  me  a  check  on  the 
Bank  of  Kentucky  for  $25. 

Q.  Did  you  have  any  conversation  with 
Dr.  Gatling  in  Dodd's  office? 

A.  There  was  something  said  about  his 
coffee-mill  gun,  and  he  remarked  that  he 
was  glad  the  Government  did  not  take  it, 
as  he  wanted  it  for  the  South;  that  he  had 
sent  a  man  to   Europe,  or  had  made  ar-     * 
rangements  to  send  him,  to  have  it  patented 
for  the  use  of  the  South. 
Q.  Was  Dodd  present? 
A.  Yes,  sir;  he  was. 

The  Judge  Advocate  here  handed  the 
witness  a  pamphlet  containing  Dodd's  ad 
dress.  [See  Appendix.] 

Q.  Is  that  the  address  you  referred  to? 
A.  Yes,  sir ;  Harrison  gave  me  a  copy  of 
that  for  Judge  Bullitt. 
Q.  Did  you  take  them  to  Judge  Bullitt  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir.  I  saw  many  copies  of  them  in 
Harrison's  office.  This  is  the  book  they 
used  for  their  secret  cypher  in  this  city. 
By  it  they  sent  all  important  commnnica- 
tions  through  the  mail.  Harrison  told  me 
that  was  the  book  they  used  for  their  se 
cret  cypher.  Bullitt  and  Bowles  also  told 
me  about  the  secret  cypher,  and  that  a 
person  might  get  hold  of  that  secret  cypher, 
but  if  he  had  not  the  key,  he  could  not 
read  it. 

Q.  You  may  explain  how  the  book  is 
used  for  the  secret  cypher. 

A.We  counted  from  the  left,  and  used  fig 
ures  entirely  to  spell  words.  If  I  wanted 
to  spell  the  word  "the,"  I  would  put  the 
figure  "3"  at  the  top  of  .the  page  to  indi 
cate  the  page  of  the  book  I  used.  I  would 
put  the  figure  6  in  brackets,  as  indicating 
the  line  of  that  page,  and  then  1,  2  and  3, 
to  denote  that  they  were  the  first,  second, 
and  third  letters  of  that  line. 

Q.  Did  any  thing  take  place  at  Dodd's 
office  that  day? 

A.  No,  sir;  not  that  I  recollect. 
Q.  Did    you    see    Dodd    again    at    that 
time? 

A.  I  came  here  on  Saturday  evening,  and 
went  home  on  Monday  morning.  I  did 
not  see  Dodd  again,  and  had  no  further 
consultation  with  him.  1  saw  General  Car- 
rington  and  Governor  Morton  while  here, 
and  I  made  known  to  them  what  I  had 
done.  General  Carrington  copied  the 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


Ill 


1  had  with  me.     I  went  back  to   Louisville 
from  here,  and  took  some  books. 

Q.  What  were  those  books  ? 

A.  The  constitutions  of  the  county  tem 
ples,  of  the  Grand  Council  of  the  State, 
and  of  the  Supreme  Council  of  the  United 
States,  and  one  or  two  rituals  of  the  order, 
also  an  address  of  the  Grand  Commander 
of  the  State  of  Indiana.  I  delivered  them 
first  to  Dr.  Kalfus,  and  when  Dr.  Kalfus 
returned  them  I  gave  them  to  Judge  Bui- 
litt.  I  arrived  at  Louisville  on  Monday, 
about  the  4th  of  June.  It  was  immedi 
ately  after  rny  appointment  as  Grand  Sec 
retary  of  the  State  of  Kentucky  by  Judge 
Bullitt.  The  date  of  that  appointment  was 
about  the  4th  or  5th  of  June. 

Q.  Was  that  appointment  verbal  or  writ 
ten? 

A.  We  did  nothing  in  writing  that  we 
could  avoid.  I  was  to  receive  a  salary,  but 
there  was  nothing  stipulated ;  we  were  to  go 
according  to  the  Constitution  of  the  Grand 
Council  of  the  State  of  Indiana.  1  was  to 
receive,  as  I  understood,  about  $800  per 
annum. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  receive  pay  for  the  posi 
tion  you  held? 

A.  I  received  pay  from  the  members  of 
the  order,  and  I  collected  the  initiation  fee, 
and  was  told  by  Kalfus  and  Bullitt  to  keep 
it  for  my  pay.  I  received  about  $200. 

Q.  What  office  did  Judge  Bullitt  hold? 

A.  lie  was  elected  Grand  Commander  of 
the  State.  At  that  time  he  was  the  only 
Grand  Councilman  in  the  State.  He  was 
elected  at  the  meeting  of  the  Grand  Coun 
cil  by  members  of  the  different  counties  of 
the  State  of  Kentucky.  I  was  not  at  that 
meeting.  I  was  at  the  meeting  of  the 
Grand  Council  in  Kentucky  on  the  night 
of  the  27th  of  June,  1864. 

Q.  Who  was  present  at  that  meeting  ? 

A.  Judge  Bullitt,  Mr.  W.  K.  Thomas,  a 
Mr.  John  J.  Felix,  of  Lawrenceburg,  Ken 
tucky,  two  gentlemen  from  Paris,  and  Mr. 
T.J.Bosley;  D.  C.  WTipps,  who  was  treas 
urer  of  the  Grand  Council,  was  there ;  also 
Judge  G.  Williams,  of  Hancock  county, 
and  some  others  I  do  not  now  remember. 
There  was  also  a  Mr.  Tirrell,  of  Owen  coun 
ty,  or  Boone  county  ;  he  had  formerly  been 
in  the  Federal  army.  There  were  about 
sixteen  'or  seventeen  persons  present. 

Q.  Was  any  business  transacted  ? 

A.  Delegates  were  elected  to  attend  the 
Supreme  Council  in  Chicago  on  the  first 
day  of  July.  Judge  Bullitt,  by  virtue  of 
his  office  as  Grand  Commander,  was  a 
member.  Prior,  Winchester  and  Wipps 
were  all  three  elected. 

Q.  Was  any  other  business  of  importance 
transacted  at  that  meeting?  Any  talk 
there  with  reference  to  the  sentiments  of 
the  order? 

A.  Mr.  Bosley  made  a  short  speech  about 
the  operations  in  his  part  of  the  country ; 


he  is  from  Shelby  county ;  and  Judge  Wil 
liams  also  made  a  short  speech,  I  believe, 
about  the  operations  and  organization  of 
his  county,  and  of  its  action  in  connection 
with  the  uprising  to  resist  the  Government 
This  received  the  general  sanction  of  all 
present. 

Q.  Did  you  attend  any  meeting  in  this 
State  before  that  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  on  the  14th  of  June.  I  was 
told  by  Dr. Bowles  when  the  meeting  would 
be  held,  and  also  by  Mr.  Dodd.  They  both 
said  they  would  like  me  to  be  here  if  I 
could  come,  and  I  did  come. 

Q.  Who  was  present  at  that  meeting? 

A.  The  meeting  was  held  in  the  building 
occupied  by  Dodd  as  a  printing  establish 
ment.  Dodd  was  present  and  presided 
over  the  meeting.  Mr.  Harrison  was  there 
as  Secretary.  Mr.  TIeftren's  name  was  called 
as  Deputy  Grand  Commander,  but  he 
was  not  present.  Mr.  Bowles,  Mr.  Milligan 
and  Mr.  Humphreys  were  there.  Mr.  Dodd 
told  me  it  was  Andrew  Humphreys.  I 
think  I  know  Mr.  Humphreys,  but  I  could 
not  swear  to  him  positively.  Mr.  Milligan, 
whom  I  see  present  in  this  room,  (the  wit 
ness  here  pointed  to  the  accused,  L.  P. 
Milligan,)  is  the  same  that  was  present; 
also  Dr.  Bowles,  one  of  the  accused.  There 
was  a  Judge  Borton,  or  Borden,  also  pres 
ent.  A  Mr.  Otey,  an  old  gentleman,  was 
there;  also,  Mr.  Gatling,  and  Dr  Athon, 
Secretary  of  State;  Mr.  McBride,  from 
Evansville,  and  a  Mr.  Everett,  from 
Evansville,  also  a  Mr.  Thompson.  I  re 
member  his  being  appointed  on  a  com 
mittee.  Thompson  and,  I  think,  Dr.  Athon 
and  McBride  were  the  three  gentlemen 
appointed  on  that  committee  to  exam 
ine  an  invention  that  had  been  inven 
ted  by  a  member  of  the  order,  and  the 
committee  reported  that  the  invention  was 
a  good  one,  and  ought  to  be  adopted  by 
the  order;  they  recommended  that  it  be 
turned  over  to  the  Committee  of  Thirteen, 
who  should  distribute  it  to  those  members 
of  the  order  that  in  their  judgment  might 
be  intrusted  with  it.  I  know  he  was  on 
two  committees  during  the  day.  There 
was  also  a  committee  on  military  aflairs, 
and  one  on  the  subject  of  education.  Mil 
ligan,  Bowles,  McBride  and  Dr.  Gatling 
were  four  of  the  military  committee,  the 
other  I  do  not  remember. 

Q.  Was  any  thing  reported  by  the  Mili 
tary  Committee? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  they  reported  a  bill  setting 
forth  their  views,  that  the  order  ought  to 
be  organized  as  a  military  organization  at 
once,  and  armed. 

Q.  When  was  this  ? 

A.  This  was  on  the  14th  of  June.  Dodd, 
at  the  opening  of  the  meeting,  read  an  ad 
dress  to  consider  if  the  order  had  any  poli 
tics,  and  if  so,  what  they  were.  The  sub 
ject  of  education  was  considered,  and  also 


112 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


if  the  time  for  action  was  not  at  hand. 
These  were  the  main  points  of  his  address. 

Q.  Were  any  military  appointments  made 
at  that  meeting  ? 

Yes,  sir;  one  Mr.  Walker  was  elected  a 
Major  General.  There  were  elections  of 
delegates  to  the  Supreme  Council,  which 
was  a  meeting  of  delegates  from  the  differ 
ent  State  Councils,  to  be  held  at  Chicago  on 
the  first  day  of  July. 

Q.  Who  was  elected? 

A.  Mr.  Dodd,  by  'virtue  of  his  rank  as 
Grand  Commander,  was  one;  J.  G.  Davis 
and  Mr.  Lasselle  were  elected;  and  the 
Major  Generals,  by  virtue  of  their  rank, 
were  ex  (ffitio  members. 

Q.  Do  you  know  who  were  the  Major 
Generals  of  the  order  at  that  time  ? 

A.  Mr.  Milligan,  Mr.  Bowles,  Mr.  Humph 
reys  and  Mr.  Walker,  who  was  elected  vice, 
Mr.  Yeakle,  who,  it  seems,  had  been  a  Ma 
jor  General,  but  was  now  thrown  out. 
Walker  was  said  to  be  a  man  who  had  some 
military  experience. 

Q.  Was  there  any  protest  on  the  part  of 
Milligan  on  his  accepting  this  appointment? 

A.  Not  a  word.  They  were  not  elected 
that  day;  they  had  been  elected  before. 
Mr.  Dodd  called  over  their  names  as  Major 
Generals.  Walker  was  the  only  Major  Gen 
eral  elected  that  day. 

Q.  Did  any  thing  else  take  place  at  that 
meeting? 

A.  The  subject  of  Mr.  Coffin  was  dis 
cussed  at  considerable  length.  McBride, 
of  Evansville,  had  a  great  deal  to  say  about 
it.  He  knew  Coffin  about  Evansville  as  a 
Government  Detective;  that  he  had  been 
engaged  in  sending  contraband  goods  South, 
they  were  taken,  and  it  got  the  people  into 
trouble;  he  believed  that  he  was  still  in  that 
kind  of  business.  McBride  also  said  he 
had  a  report  of  the  order  known  as  the 
Loyal  League;  that  he  had  men  in  the 
order  who  reported  to  him  every  thing  that 
occurred;  he  said  a  good  deal  about  the 
Government  damning  secret  organizations, 
when  here  was  one  they  supported  them 
selves.  He  also  said  that  the  men  of  Van- 
derburg  and  Posey  counties  were  members 
of  this  order,  and  also  several  of  the  Home 
Guard  companies  of  the  Legion,  and  he 
said  that  two  or  three  companies  there  who 
had  Government  arms,  were  under  his  con 
trol.  He  said  something  about  an  election 
there,  when  the  members  of  this  order  went 
to  the  polls  armed;  the  members  of  the 
Home  Guards  were  there,  also  armed,  he 
said,  but  they  knew  the  members  of  the 
order  were  armed,  and  did  not  attempt  to 
do  any  thing.  He  did  not  say  how  he  knew 
those  other  men  were  armed,  but  McBride 
said  the  members  of  the  order  were  armed. 

Q.  What  else  was  done  at  this  meeting? 

A.  The  meeting,  generally,  was  appointed 
a  committee  to  attend  a  meeting  at  Hamil 
ton,  Ohio.  Coffin  was  expected  to  be  them 


He  had  not  been  seen  for  several  days,  and 
was  supposed  to  be  there.  Dodd  volun 
teered  his  services  to  go  to  Hamilton,  and 
if  Coffin  was  there,  pick  a  quarrel  with  him 
and  shoot  him.  He  wanted  to  know  who 
would  go  with  him.  McBride  said  he  knew 
Coffin,  but  he  was  sorry,  he  said,  that  hig 
business  was  such  that  he  could  not  go. 
Bowles,  Dodd,  Milligan  and  myself,  went  to 
Hamilton  the  next  day. 

Q.  Did  you  see  Dodd  or  Bowles  at  Ham 
ilton? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  went  up  to  Dodd  and 
Bowles  after  Vallandigham  had  got  through 
speaking,  to  bid  them  good-by,  as  I  wa* 
starting  for  Cincinnati;  and  Bowles  leaned 
down  and  asked  me  if  I  had  seen  Coffin. 
I  said,  "I  don't  know  the  man."  They 
then  remembered  that  I  had  previously 
told  them  that  I  did  not  know  him.  They 
said  they  did  not  think  Coffin  was  there,  a* 
they  could  not  find  him. 

Q.  What  did  Dodd  say^at  the  meeting? 

A.  I  do  not  remember  any  thing,  save 
that  he  said  that  Government  detectives 
ought  to  be  murdered;  he  might  have  said 
killed.  He  said  if  Coffin  was  at  Hamilton, 
he  would  pick  a  quarrel  with  him  and  shoot 
him. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  then? 

A.  To  Cincinnati,  and  thence  to  Louis 
ville. 

Q.  When  were  you  here  next  ? 

A.  I  got  to  Louisville  on  Thursday  night, 
and  came  up  here  about  the  first  of  the 
next  week — some  time  during  the  week.  I 
then  saw  Dodd  and  Harrison,  and  Mr.  Jo 
seph  Ristine,  Auditor  of  State. 

Q.  Was  any  thing  said  or  done  ? 

A.  I  was  sent  by  Judge  Bullitt  to  see 
about  the  dispatch  which  he  had  received? 

Q.  What  was  that? 

A.  The  dispatch  was  something  about 
Aunt  Lucy  being  sick,  and  he  wanted  to 
know  if  such  a  dispatch  had  been  received, 
Dodd  knew  nothing  about  the  dispatch. 
He  asked  me  if  I  knew  what  Aunt  Lucy 
meant.  I  said  I  did,  and  told  him  it  had 
reference  to  the  Sou  them  Confederacy;  and 
he  seemed  to  be  satisfied.  Bullitt  also  said 
something  about  a  letter  that  Mr.  Dodd 
had  gotten.  It  was  a  letter  to  Dodd,  Bowles 
and  Ristine, and  signed  "Dick."  He  warned 
them  against  a  man  named  Coffin.  Dodd 
showed  me  the  letter;  he  then  took  me 
down  to  the  office  of  Ristine,  and  they  said 
they  supposed  the  letter  was  written  by 
Dick  Bright.  Dodd  gave  me  an  introduc 
tion  to  Ristine1  s  son,  and  requested  me  to 
stay  pretty  much  all  day,  and  see  if  Coffin 
passed  by" — if  so,  have  Ristine's  son  point 
him  out  to  me.  They  succeeded  in  point 
ing  him  out  to  me,  about  sundown.  I  staid 
there  pretty  near  half  a  day.  I  had  some 
talk  with  Ristine  about  this  letter,  but  I 
don't  remember  whether  any  thing  was  said 
about  the  order  or  not. 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


113 


Q.  Did  any  thing  further  take  place  at 
Indianapolis  during  that  visit? 

A.  Not  that  1  recollect. 

Q.  Where  did  you  go  next? 

A.  From  here  I  went  back  to  Louisville. 
There  I  saw  Thomas,  Bullitt,  Kalfus  and 
others,  in  Kalfus'  office.  I  was  initiated  into 
the  order  at  Louisville. 

Q.   When  were  you  here  next  after  that? 

A.  I  was  here  the  next  time  about  the 
last  of  July.  I  then  saw  Dodd,  Dr.  Athon 
and  Mr..  Harrison. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  any  thing  of  import 
ance? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  Judge  Bullitt  had  started  to 
Chicago  on  the  evening  of  the  19th  of  July. 
He  said  that  Dodd  and  a  number  of  the 
other  leaders  of  the  order  from  this  State 
arid  Illinois  were  to  be  at  Chicago  to  have  a 
conference  there.  Bullitt  started  to  Chi 
cago  on  the  19th  of  July.  We  expected 
him  back  in  four  or  five  days,  and  as  he  did 
not  come  on  Thursday  night,  July  28,  I 
came  up  here,  and  on  Friday  morning  I 
saw  Dodd  coming  up  from  toward  the  depot. 
I  went  down  to  his  office  about  10  o'clock, 
and  he  told  me  he  had  just  come  into  the 
city  on  a  train.  He  said  Judge  Bullitt 
would  be  at  home  on  that  day  or  Saturday: 
He  thought  likely  he  might  go  through 
here,  but  he  was  not  sure.  He  therefore 
wished  me  to  go  home  and  get  twenty  or 
thirty  good  runners,  so  that  as  soon  as 
Judge  Bullitt  returned  they  might  be  sent 
off.  He  said  the  programme  was  arranged, 
and  every  thing  ready.  I  went  to  see  Dr. 
Athon,  and  had  some  talk  with  him.  Dodd 
went  around  without  me,  and  said,  "You 
can  come  around  after  a  bit."  He  didn't 
want  both  of  us  seen  going  there  together, 
as  he  thought  it  would  look  suspicious. 

Q.  What  did  Dodd  tell  him  ? 

A.  He  did  not  tell  him  that  the  time  was 
set,  but  I  told  Dr.  Athon  afterward  what 
Dodd  had  said. 

Q.   When  did  you  tell  him  that  ? 

A.  I  told  Dr.  Athon  of  it  the  same  day. 
Athon  did  not  seem  to  think  that  the  time 
had  come  yet  for  revolution,  but  that  it 
would  come.  He  said  it  would  not  be  suc 
cessful  now. 

Q.  Did  he  discourage  you  in  any  way  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  He  said  the  time  had  not 
come,  but  that  the  time  would  come  when 
it  would  be  successful. 

Q.  Did  Dodd  open  to  you  this  scheme,  in 
any  way? 

A.  No,  sir.  He  told  me  there  was  to  be 
a  meeting  of  some  of  the  heads  of  the  order 
here  on  the  Tuesday  following,  and  he 
would  like  Judge  Bullitt  to  be  here;  and 
he  wished  me  to  tell  him  to  come,  or  send 
some  reliable  man  that  he  could  depend 
upon  to  learn  what  their  conclusion  was. 

Q.  What  were  those  couriers  to  do  ? 

A.  They  were  to  notify  our  men  where 
and  when  to  concentrate. 
8 


Q.   What  was  decided  at  Chicago  ? 

A.  There  was  a  difference  of  opinion  there 
as  to  the  day  when  the  programme  was  to 
be  carried  out,  and  the  time  was  to  be 
settled  here  at  the  meeting  on  Tuesday. 

Q.  When  did  you  see  Bullitt  next  ? 

A.  When  I  was  on  the  cars  the  next  day 
I  saw  Bullitt.  He  was  dusty,  as  though  he 
had  been  traveling.  He  said  he  had  come 
in  on  the  Bellefontaine  train,  and  that  he 
had  left  a  note  for  Dodd,  but  had  left  it 
at  the  house  of  some  one  else.  He  asked 
me  to  go  on  into  the  front  car.  He  said  he 
had  been  registering  his  name  as  Charles 
Smith.  We  went  into  a  car  where  there 
were  but  a  few  people,  and  he  told  me  the 
programme  was  all  arranged  for  this  up 
rising,  how  it  was  to  be  conducted,  and  all 
about  it.  When  we  got  to  Jetfersonville,  he 
got  him  a  buggy.  On  Saturday  he  wished 
to  have  A.  O.  Brannan  and  Dr.  Bayless  sent 
out  to  him,  and  on  Sunday  Kalfus  and 
Thomas,  and  to  those  four  he  would  com 
municate  the  uprising  of  the  order.  He 
said  he  expected  to  be  arrested,  but  if  he 
saw  all  these  men,  he  didn't  care  if  he  was 
arrested 

When  we  got  to  Louisville,  as  soon  as  the 
ferrjr  boat  landed,  a  young  man  came  on 
board  for  his  arrest.  Young  Hewitt  did  it, 

On  Monday  night  I  was  sent  back  here  to 
Dodd  by  Kalfus  and  Thomas,  to  get  the 
final  arrangements  as  soon  as  they  were  con 
cluded  on,  and  I  was  to  go  back  and  report 
to  them.  I  came  on  Monday  night.  On 
Friday  night,  when  we  were  at  Dodd's  house, 
he  said  he  would  send  his  son  for  Bowles  to 
be  here,  and  that  he  sent  Mr.  Harrison  to 
go  after  some  other  gentlemen.  Mr.  Harri 
son  was  to  go  to  Lafayette  for  one  person, 
and  he  pulled  out  his  money,  and  gave  him 
sufficient  to  pay  his  expenses. 

I  went  to  see  Dodd  after  I  came  back. 
He  seemed  very  much  excited,  gritted  his 
teeth,  and  said  that  he  hoped  they  had  acted 
the  gentlemen,  and  had  not  searched  Bullitt, 
as  he  had  drafts  on  Montreal.  He  then  went 
to  work  and  gave  me  the  programme.  I 
think  this  was  about  the  2d  of  August.  He 
showed  and  read  me  letters  from  two  or 
three  gentlemen.  They  were  not  signed  by 
any  name,  but  they  were  fully  concurring 
in  the  matter.  He  had  sent  them  word, 
and  they  didn't  come  here.  Then  he  told 
me  what  the  programme  was,  and  impressed 
upon  me  the  importance  of  secrecy.  He 
said  if  Bullitt  had  not  been  arrested,  I  could 
not  have  got  the  programme  at  all. 

He  said  they  had  abandoned  the  idea  of 
holding  the  secret  meetings,  but  would  hold 
them  hereafter  as  Democratic  mass  meet 
ings,  and  that  one  was  to  be  held  at  Peoria, 
111.,  on  the  3d  of  August,  I  think.  Another 
here  on  the  15th  or  16th  of  August,  and 
that  his  men  would  be  instructed  to  come 
here  armed :  that  they  were  going  to  work 
to  release  the  prisoners  here,  and  seize  the 


114 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


arsenal  here,  at  Springfield  and  Chicago,  111.* 
and  Columbus,  Ohio,  on  the  same  day,  and 
to  release  the  prisoners  at  Johnson's  Island 
and  Camp  Chase,  Ohio,  and  at  Camp  Doug 
las  and  Rock  Island,  111.,  and  then  proceed  to 
Louisville,  and  take  possession  of  the  arsenal 
there  and  at  Frankfort,  Ky.,  and  with  the 
rebel  prisoners  armed  they  would  go  to 
work.  Their  difference  at  Chicago  was 
whether  they  should  wait  until  the  rebel 
forces  should  be  sent  into  Eastern  Ken 
tucky  to  co-operate  with  them,  or  to  make 
their  uprising  now,  and  co-operate  with  the 
rebel  forces  when  Davis  could  send  them. 

Q.  What  was  Dodd's  opinion  ? 

A.  His  idea  was  to  go  ahead  on  the  15th 
or  16th  of  August,  and  these  letters  from 
these  men  agreed  with  him.  Mr.  Walker 
was  to  be  here  from  New  York  on  the 
Thursday  after  I  saw  Mr.  Dodd,  which  was 
on  Tuesday. 

Q.  Do  you  know  why  this  insurrection 
was  put  off? 

AL.  I  do  not.  I  never  saw  Dodd  afterward 
until  I  saw  him  here. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Tuesday,  November  2,  at  9  o'clock,  A.  M. 

COUET   ROOM,  iNIHANAFOLIS,  INDIANA,  \ 

November  2,  1864,  9  o'clock,  A.  M.  J 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  ad 
journment. 

All  the  members  present.  Also,  the 
Judge  Advocate,  the  accused,  and  their 
counsel. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

The  accused,  Stephen  Horsey,  presented 
the  following : 
To   the  President  and   Members  of  the  Military 

Commission,  now  in  Session  : 

The  undersigned,  Stephen  Horsey,  one 
of  the  defendants  now  on  trial,  being  with 
out  counsel,  respectfully  requests  that  the 
Hon.  Thomas  R  Cobb  be  admitted  as  coun 
sel  for  him  on  this  trial. 

[Signed]  STEPHEN  HORSEY. 

November  2,  1864. 

The  examination  of  Felix  G.  Stidger,  a 
witness  for  the  Government,  was  then  re- 
Bumed  as  follows : 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate: 

State  whether  in  any  of  those  conversa 
tions  with  either  Heffren  or  Bowles,  they 
stated  to  you  what  this  order  numbered  in 
the  States  of  Indiana,  Illinois,  Missouri,  and 
Ohio. 

Answer.  Heffren  told  me  that  the  organ 
isation  of  the  order  was  about  complete  in 
Indiana,  and  the  number  was  between 
seventy-five  and  eighty  thousand  men.  I 
never  understood  any  definite  number  in 
Illinois  or  Missouri,  but  I  understood  that 
the  heads  of  the  order  from  those  States 
pledged  from  Illinois  fifty  thousand  to  go 
to  the  field,  and  thirty  thousand  from  Mis 
souri.  Ohio  never  stipulated  any  definite 
number,  but  would  furnish  men. 


Q.  What,  if  any  thing,  was  said  to  you 
by  Heffren  or  Bowles,  as  to  the  extent  of 
the  arming  of  the  organization,  and  with 
what  kind  of  arms  ? 

A.  Bowles  made  a  statement  in  the  Coun- 
j  cil  of  the  14th  of  June,  that  the  organiza- 
I  tion  in  his  county  numbered  about  six  hun- 
|  clred  men,  but  that  there  was  a  military 
|  organization  amounting  to  nine  hundred 
men,  armed  and  equipped. 

Q.  Was  this  military  organization  outside 
of  the  order? 

A.  I  do  not  know.  He  said  the  Order  of 
the  Sons  of  Liberty  numbered  six  hundred 
men  in  his  county,  and  nine  hundred  men 
armed  and  equipped;  but  he  did  not  say 
with  what  arms.  He  also  stated  that  he 
had  an  arrangement  with  a  man  to  furnish 
any  number  or  kind  of  arms.  He  made 
this  statement  in  the  Grand  Council  of  the 
14th  of  June,  in  the  way  of  a  speech. 

Q.  WTho  was  present  at  the  time  he  was 
making  that  speech  ? 

A.  Mr.  Dodd  was  present;  Mr.  Harrison 
and  Mr.  Milligan  were  there,  and  Mr.  Hor 
sey  was  there  at  one  time.  Mr.  Bowles 
made  a  remark  two  or  three  times  during 
the  day. 

Q.  Was  Mr.  Bingham  present  at  that 
meeting? 

A.  No,  sir;  not  on  the  14th  of  June  that 
I  saw. 

Q.  Was  it  stated  what  Sf;'te  should  be 
made  the  battle-ground  ? 

A.  Kentucky  and  Missouri;  that  was 
what  Bowles  and  Dodcl  told  me. 

Q.  What  was  said,  if  any  thing,  in  refer 
ence  to  any  understanding  with  the  Con 
federate  forces  ? 

A.  Bowles  said  they  would  go  to  Ken 
tucky  and  have  a  regular  understanding 
with 'the  Confederates,  and  act  in  concert 
with  them ;  and  that  they  had  sent  a  man 
named  Dickerson  to  Richmond  to  have  the 
Confederate  authorities  send  an  invading 
force  to  act  in  concert  with  their  order. 

Q.  Was  there  any  concert  with  the  rebel 
forces  in  Kentucky  or  elsewhere  ? 

A.  There  was  communication  between 
this  order  and  the  guerrillas  in  Kentucky. 
Bullitt  instructed  a  man  to  try  and  get  a 
place  appointed  for  him  to  meet  Colonel 
I  Jesse,  said  to  be  a  rebel  Colonel  in  com 
mand  of  the  rebel  forces  in  Kentucky ;  and 
he  instructed  this  man  to  go  to  Colonel 
Syphert,  a  rebel  Colonel,  said  to  be  in  com 
mand  of  a  rebel  squad,  and  have  a  confer 
ence  with  him  about  the  capture  of  Louis 
ville. 

Q.  Had  you  any  conversation  with  Bowles 
in  reference  to  communication  with  the 
rebels? 

A.  I  had.  Bowles  at  first  objected  to  this 
uprising,  until  the  rebels  should  invade  the 
eastern  part  of  the  State,  as  he  said  they 
would.  This  man  Dickerson  was  sent  South 
ito  communicate  with  the  rebel  force*. 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


115 


Bowles  said  he  would  consent  to  the  upris 
ing  on  the  15th  or  16th  of  August,  as  Dodd 
had  said,  provided  Colonel  Syphert,  Colonel 
Jesse,  and  Walker  Taylor  would  assist  in 
the  capture  of  Louis-ville  until  the  forces 
of  this  State  could  get  there. 

Q.  What  forces  of  this  State  were  refer 
red- to? 

A.  The  uprising  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty. 

Q.  Have  you  any  knowledge  of  attempts 
or  efforts  on  the  part  of  anv  members  of 
this  order  to  procure  arms  c  If  so,  what 
kind? 

A.  Not  directly.  The  question  of  arming 
was  discussed  on  the  14th  of  June.  Some 
said,  tax  the  members  of  the  order;  others 
contended  that  each  district  should  arm 
itself;  while  others  contended  that  each 
individual  should  arm  himself,  to  resist  the 
Government,  and  that  to  do  so,  they  would 
dispense  with  the  luxuries  of  life,  to  pro 
cure  money  to  get  arms  with  which  to  re 
sist  the  Government. 

Q.  Had  you  any  talk,  individually,  with 
Bowles,  or  any  other  member  of  the  order, 
in  reference  to  procuring  arms  ? 

A.  Bowles  wanted  to  know,  the  last  time 
I  saw  him,  if  I  knew  Peters,  of  Cincinnati ; 
he  wanted  to  get  arms  of  him;  and  also 
B.  C.  Kent,  of  New  Albany,  Indiana;  he 
wanted  to  communicate  through  him  with 
Dr.  Gordon,  of  New  Albany,  that  he  might 
have  arms  shipped  to  Gordon,  and  wagoned 
out  into  the  country. 

Q.  Have  you  any  knowledge  of  any  ef 
forts  to  procure  lances  ? 

A.  Dr.  Bowles  asked  me  if  I  could  have 
three  or  four  thousand  lances  made;  he 
wanted  that  number,  and  thought  they 
could  be  made  in  Kentucky  without  suspi 
cion.  He  wanted  three  or  four  thousand 
men  armed  with  lances  and  revolvers;  he 
«aid  he  could  make  them  of  great  ser 
vice. 

Q.  I  think  you  stated,  did  you  not,  that 
Bowles  was  present  at  the  meeting  in  New 
York? 

A.  He  told  me  he  was. 

Q.  Did  he  tell  what  was  done  at  the  meet 
ing  in  New  York,  on  the  22d  of  February  ? 

A.  He  said  that  Vallandigham  was  elected 
Supreme  Commander  that  day  ;  that  there 
was  a  change  in  the  name  of  the  order,  that 
the  ritual  was  changed,  and.  a  slight  change 
in  the  colloquy,  though  I  do  not  remember 
what  it  was.  There  was  a  committee  ap 
pointed  to  make  a  change  in  the  ritual,  and 
after  it  was  made,  the  manuscript  was  sent 
to  Vallandigham  for  his  revision.  He  re 
vised  it  and  made  one  or  two  additions. 
He  made  the  addition, u  Resistance  to  tyrants 
is  obedience  to  God."  This  was  said  by  Mr.  | 
Piper,  by  Mr.  Bowles  and  other  members  of 
the  order  to  have  been  made  by  Vallandig 
ham.  And  there  was  an  invocation  at  the 
end  of  the  first  degree  said  to  have  been 
added  by  Vallandigham,  and  a  reference  to 


a  passage  of  Scripture,  which  occurs  in  the 
first  or  third  degree,  was  also  said  to  have 
been  added  by  Vallandigham. 

Q.  Have  you  any  knowledge  of  money 
being  raised  or  expended,  to  procure  arms 
and  organize  the  society? 

A.  I  was  told  by  Mr.  Kern,  a  member  of 
th^T  order,  that  Judge  Williams,  of  Ken 
tucky,  had  given  $100,  and  other  members 
$200  for  organizing  the  order,  and  that  he 
had  expended  that  money  in  the  purchase 
of  arms,  and  that  they  had  sent  the  men 
with  the  arms  South. 

Q.  WThere  did  Kern  live  ? 

A.  In  Louisville. 

Q.  How  do  you  know  him  to  be  a  mem 
ber  of  the  order  ? 

A.  By  having  met  him  in  Council,  and 
having  conversations  frequently  with  him. 
Kalfus  also  told  me  that  Booking  was  fur 
nished  with  money  for  the  purpose  of  get 
ting  this  Greek  fire. 

Q.  Have  you  known  Bowles  to  spend 
money? 

A.  He  told  me  he  had  spent  $2,000,  for 
the  benefit  of  the  order,  and  would  spend 
all  he  had,  were  it  necessary.  He  did  not 
say  in  what  way  he  had  spent  the  money. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  had  any  talk  with 
Bowles  with  respect  to  the  uprising,  and 
when  he  favored  its  taking  place? 

A.  He  told  me  he  cared  nothing  about 
the  election;  he  was  satisfied  Lincoln  would 
be  elected;  he  wanted  the  time  spent  in 
perfecting  the  organization  and  getting 
ready  for  the  uprising.  He  said  he  would 
agree  to  the  uprising  on  that  day,  provided 
the  rebel  Colonels  could  be  got  to  act  in 
concert  with  the  order. 

Q.  What  do  you  know  about  this  Commit 
tee  of  Thirteen? 

A.  The  question  of  a  Committee  of  Thir 
teen  was  discussed  in  the  Grand  Council  of 
the  14th  of  June.  They  were  desirous  to 
have  this  Committee  of  Thirteen  to  carry 
on  the  concerns  of  the  Grand  Council  during 
its  recess;  and  it  was  a  question  whether 
they  should  be  appointed  by  the  Grand 
Council  or  by  the  Grand  Commander,  and 
known  only  to  him.  There  was  a  Commit 
tee  of  Thirteen  so  called,  in  Kentucky,  but 
I  understood  from  Kalfus  it  was  composed 
only  of  seven;  they  were  to  carry  on  the 
business  of  the  order  during  the  recess. 

Q.  State  whether  or  not  this  organization 
appointed  any  men  to  act  as  spies  upon  the 
Government. 

A.  McBride  said  on  the  14th  of  June  that 
he  had  men  acting  as  spies  in  the  Loyal 
League,  who  reported  to  him  every  thing  that 
was  done.  Mr.  Harrison  also  said  they  had 
men  from  outside  the  order,  so  that  they 
should  not  net  both  ways,  employed  as  spies 
and  acting  for  the  benefit  of  the  order. 
Dodd  wanted  me  to  act  in  that  capacity. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  met,  or  had  consulta 
tion  with  a  man  by  the  name  of  Hines  ? 


116 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


A.  No,  sir.  Piper  told  me  that  Hines 
was  appointed  on  Vallandigham's  staff,  and 
that  he  was  then  waiting  in  Canada  to  take 
charge  of  the  releasing  of  the  prisoners  on 
Johnson's  Island,  or  Rock  Island,  and  Bowles 
of  the  other.  Hines  was  formerly  a  Captain 
in  the  rebel  army,  and  made  his  escape  from 
the  Ohio  State  Penitentiary  with  John 
Morgan. 

Q.  Have  you  any  knowledge  of  members 
of  the  rebel  army  being  initiated  into  this 
order  ?  If  so,  when  and  where  ? 

A.  There  was  arebel  Colonel  Anderson,  of 
the  3d  rebel  Kentucky  regiment  of  Infan 
try,  initiated  into  the  order,  about  the  last 
of  June,  1864. 

Q.  Who  initiated  him? 

A.  Kalfus  told  me  that  he  gave  him  the 
first  degree,  and  directed  me  to  give  him 
the  second  and  third.  There  was  also  a 
Captain  Van  Morgan  who  was  initiated  into 
the  order,  and  had  the  full  confidence  of  the 
members  of  the  order  in  Kentucky ;  also 
Dick  Pratt  and  Jim  McCracklin.  There 
was  also  another  who  said  he  was  a  Captain 
of  a  squad  of  guerrillas.  I  saw  him  initiated 
in  Kalfus'  office. 

Q.  Who  initiated  him? 

A.  Either  Kalfus  or  myself,  I  do  not 
recollect  which.  Kalfus  I  know  gave  me 
an  introduction  to  him.  Kalfus  I  know 
initiated  those  other  men. 

Q.  Where? 

A.  He  told  me  that  he  did  it  in  his  office. 
I  conversed  with  one  of  them  afterward, 
and  satisfied  myself  that  he  was  a  member 
of  the  order. 

Q.  You  may  now  give  to  the  Court  some 
of  the  signs,  grips,  passwords,  and  colloquies 
of  the  different  degrees  of  the  order. 

[The  witness  here  replied  substantially 
and  in  detail  as  on  page  51.] 

[A  pamphlet  was  here  handed  to  the 
witness  by  the  Judge  Advocate.] 

Q.  What  is  that  ? 

A.  It  is  the  Constitution  of  the  Supreme 
Council.  I  recognize  it  by  having  seen  it 
frequently  before,  and  from  having  been 
instructed  by  Dodd,  Bullitt,  and  Harrison, 
that  it  was  that  work. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  used  it  in  instructing 
others  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  do  not  know  that  I  have. 
We  only  had  one  or  two  copies  in  our  State. 
I  have  frequently  told  persons  of  such  a 
book. 

A  pamphlet  entitled  Constitution  and 
Laws  of  the  S.  C.  was  then  introduced  in 
evidence  by  the  Judge  Advocate.  [See  Ap 
pendix.] 

Also,  a  letter  bearing  date  October  8, 1863. 

Also,  a  letter  bearing  date  June  28,  1864. 

Q.  Are  there  any  private  marks  of  the 
order  on  the  letter  of  June  28th  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  There  are.  The  letters  0. 
S.  L.  are  written  under  the  date,  in  small 
characters,  and  would  be  calculated  to  mis 


lead  a  person  who  did  not  particularly  no 
tice  them.  S.  C.  means  Supreme  Com 
mander;  or  it  may  mean  Supreme  Council. 
These  letters  make  it  an  official  letter. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  was  initiated  in  the  Vestibule  degree  of 
the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty  on  the  5th 
of  May,  1864.  I  took  the  first  degree  about 
the  25th  or  26th  of  May,  1864.  I  entered 
the  order  as  a  regular  member,  and  as  a 
United  States  Detective,  and  1  took  the  sev 
eral  degrees  for  the  purpose  of  disclosing 
its  secrets  to  the  officers  of  the  Government. 
I  kept  the  authorities  posted  by  reporting 
sometimes  as  often  as  twice  a  week.  While 
a  member  of  the  order,  I  was  engaged  part 
of  the  time  in  Nelson  and  Bullitt,  Ken 
tucky,  in  extending  the  organization.  I 
organized  some  county  temples,  and  initia 
ted  probably  forty  or  fifty  members.  The 
authorities  knew  that  I  was  engaged  in  this 
work. 

Q.  Then  your  private  and  ostensible  pur 
poses  were  different.  Your  private  purpose 
was  to  commit  as  many  as  possible  to  the 
treasonable  schemes  of  the  order,  and  to 
keep  the  Government  officials  advised  of  it, 
and  to  bring  them  to  justice  at  the  proper 
time? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  said  it  was 
always  competent  to  show  the  character  of 
the  witness,  his  feelings,  and  the  connection 
he  has  had  with  the  transaction  he  details. 

The  Judge  Advocate  replied  that  the 
counsel  for  the  accused  were  at  liberty  to 
show  what  were  the  feelings  and  purposes 
of  the  witness,  by  inquiring  as  to  his  acts, 
but  they  could  not  inquire  as  to  his  pur 
poses  and  feelings. 

The  Court  was  cleared  for  deliberation. 
On  being  reopened,  the  Judge  Advocate 
announced  to  the  accused  that  the  objection 
was  sustained. 

Before  the  Court  was  cleared,  the  counsel 
for  the  accused,  W.  A.  Bowles,  Andrew 
Humphreys,  Horace  Heffren  and  Stephen 
Horsey,  desired  to  withdraw  the  question. 
It  was  insisted  on,  on  behalf  of  L.  P.  Milli- 
gan. 

The  only  instructions  I  gave  to  members 
were  those  I  received  from  Judge  Bullitt, 
Dr.  Kalfus,  Dr.  Bowles,  Mr.  Dodd,  Mr.  Piper 
and  other  members.  Piper  represented 
himself  as  from  Springfield,  Illinois,  and  as 
having  an  appointment  on  Vallandifrham's 
staff.  He  said  he  had  orders  from  Vallan- 
digham  to  Judge  Bullitt  and  Dr.  Bowles, 
respecting  the  time  set  for  the  uprising  of 
the  order.  Judge  Bullitt  was  Grand  Com 
mander  of  Kentucky.  I  carried  messages 
from  Bullitt  to  Kalfus  and  Bowles  about 
the  murder  of  Coffin.  At  a  meeting  in  Dr. 
Kalfus'  office,  at  which  Bullitt,  Kalfus,  Pi 
per,  and  Dr.  Chambers,  of  Warsaw,  Gallatin 


TREASON  TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


117 


county,  Kentucky,  were  present;  Bullitt  and 
Chambers  were  the  strongest  in  their  ex 
pressions  that  Coffin  should  be  killed,  and 
no  one  disagreed. 

[A  lengthy  cross-examination  on  the  wit 
ness'  interviews  with  Horace  Heffren  here 
took  place,  but  no  additional  facts  were 
elucidated.] 

I  understood  from  Dr.  Bowles  that  Bock- 
ing  was  a  member  of  the  order.  Bocking 
is  a  foreigner.  Dr.  Bowles,  Dr.  Kalfus, 
Charley  Miller,  Boyd  Winchester  and  oth 
ers,  were  present  when  Bocking  explained, 
in  his  room  at  the  Louisville  Hotel,  Louis 
ville,  his  different  applications  of  Greek 
fire.  He  exhibited  his  shell,  and  drew  a 
diagram  of  his  hand-grenade,  and  explained 
it,  together  with  his  clock  invention.  I 
never  heard  of  these  things  being  brought 
to  the  notice  and  offered  to  the  United 
States  Government.  Dr.  Bowles  said  that 
the  rebel  Government  would  pay  ten  per 
cent,  for  all  Government  property  destroyed, 
taking  the  estimated  amount  from  North 
ern  papers.  He  wished  me  to  impress  it 
upon  the  people  of  Kentucky  that  this  was 
a  fact,  and  the  inventions  of  Bocking  and 
the  Greek  fire  were  to  be  spoken  of  to  give 
the  people  confidence  in  the  order  as  to 
what  it  was  to  accomplish.  Bocking,  I 
know,  had  been  to  Canada  with  his  inven 
tions.  Bowles,  in  referring  to  this,  said, 
"We  sent  him  to  Canada  to  see  if  he  was 
willing  to  spend  his  money  for  the  benefit 
of  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty." 

Bowles,  in  making  his  speech  before  the 
Grand  Council  on  the  14th  of  June,  when 
the  Council  was  getting  an  estimate  of  the 
number  of  men  in  the  order  that  they 
could  depend  on,  said  they  numbered  six 
hundred  in  his  county,  and  that  he  had  an 
organization  of  nine  hundred  men  armed 
and  equipped.  He  did  not  state  what  they 
were  to  do,  or  what  they  were  armed  for. 
Dodd,  in  the  course  of  that  meeting,  said  it , 
was  for  the  purpose  of  forming  a  military  I 
organization,  and  to  see  if  the  time  of  ac 
tion  was  not  near  at  hand.  I  do  not  know 
that  there  had  been  any  military  organiza 
tion  up  to  that  time,  but  the  object  stated 
then  was,  to  perfect  a  military  organization; 
and  to  this  end  a  Committee  on  Military 
Affairs  was  appointed  to  report  on  a  plan 
for  its  complete  military  organization. 

At  the  June  meeting  of  the  Council  there 
was   a    Mr.    Andrew    Humphreys,   or    Dr. 
Humphreys.     He  was  called  by  both  names. 
The  Mr.  Humphreys  I  refer  to,  resembles 
that  gentleman  (the  witness  here  pointed 
to  the  accused),  but  I  could  not  swear  posi 
tively  that  he  is  the  man.     Mr.  Heffren'sj 
name   was   called   as  Deputy   Grand  Com- 1 
marider,  but  he  was  not  present.     I  could  ! 
not   say,   positively,    that  Humphreys  was 
ever  initiated  into  the  order,  unless  he  was 
the   same   that  was   present  that   day.      I 
heard  it  said  that  he  was  a  Major  General 


There  were  three  sessions  that  day,  the  first 
from  10  to  1,  another  in  the  afternoon, 
and  another  after  supper.  Dr.  or  Andrew 
Humphreys  was  present  at  the  morning 
and  afternoon  session.  I  do  not  remember 
whether  he  was  present  at  the  evening  ses 
sion  or  not.  This  Humphreys  sat  just  back 
of  me,  and  was  referred  to  once  or  twice. 

I  met  Bowles  in  the  Council  of  the  14th 
of  June,  and  at  the  meeting  of  members  of 
the  order  at  Booking's  room  at  the  Louis 
ville  Hotel.  Horsey  was  at  the  Council  of 
the  14th  of  June,  but  he  came  in  late. 
He  was  asked  why  he  was  so  careless  as  to 
initiate  such  men  as  Coffin  into  the  order, 
which  he  had  done. 

The  murder  of  Coffin  was  discussed  in  open 
Council.  Dr.  Bowles  participated  in  that 
discussion.  There  was  not  a  dissenting 
voice  with  respect  to  the  murder  of  Coffin 
at  that  or  any  other  time.  I  did  not  know 
that  Coffin  contemplated  being  at  the  meet 
ing,  though  I  expected  that  he  would  be, 
and  I  started  a  Mr.  Prentice,  a  Government 
Detective,  to  Hamilton  that  evening,  the 
14th,  to  inform  Coffin  of  his  intended 
murder.  I  told  him  to  tell  Coffin  if  he 
was  at  Hamilton,  to  be  on  his  guard,  as 
there  would  probably  be  an  attempt  to  as 
sassinate  him.  Coffin  did  not  go  to  Hamil 
ton. 

I  do  not  know  with  respect  to  this  State, 
but  in  Kentucky,  members  of  the  order  who 
were  initated,  were  instructed  in  the  mili 
tary  character  of  the  order.  Judge  Bullitt, 
Dr.  Kalfus,  myself,  or  whoever  initiated 
members,  always  instructed  them  that  the 
order  was  for  the  purpose  of  resisting  the 
Government  by  force  of  arms,  and  for  as 
sisting  the  South.  More  or  less  of  these 
instructions  were  given,  according  as  the 
members  were  deemed  reliable  or  other 
wise.  The  order  had  a  means  of  ascertain 
ing  the  number  of  arms  possessed  by  the 
members,  by  having  returns  made  by  the 
County  Temples,  in  or  under  the  guise 
of  a  subscription  list  for  certain  Democratic 
newspapers.  For  instance,  a  person  pre 
tending  to  subscribe  for  the  Cincinnati 
Enquirer,  meant  that  he  had  a  revolver ;  if 
for  the  Chicago  Times,  that  he  had  a  shot 
gun;  if  for  the  Louisville  Democrat,  that  he 
had  a  rifle ;  and  under  the  head  of  Miscel 
laneous,  would  be  indicated  the  amount  of 
ammunition  he  had  on  hand.  This  method 
of  obtaining  returns  was  resorted  to,  that 
it  might  be  kept  a  secret  from  those  who 
were  not  acquainted  with  the  plan. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Thursday,  November  3,  at  9  o'clock.A.  M. 

COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,        ) 
November  3,  18G4,  9  o'clock,  A.  M.  \ 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

All  the  members  present;  also  the  Judgo 
Advocate,  the  counsel,  and  the  accused 


118 


TREASON    TRIALS    AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


The    proceedings    were    read    and    ap- 1  chinery  that  could  be  wound  up  and  set  to 
proved.  { run  any  specified  length  of  time;  it  had  a 


The  cross-examination  of  Felix  G.  Stid- 
ger  was  then  resumed  as  follows: 

As  a  detective,  I  was  in  the  habit  of  com 
municating  the  progress  the  order  was 
making  to  General  Carrington,  Captain 
Jones,  Provost  Marshal,  and  afterward  to 


Greek  fire  attachment.  This  machine 
could  be  put  into  a  box  or  trunk,  and  with 
out  exciting  any  suspicion,  be  left  on  board 
a  steamer,  or  in  a  building,  which  would 
be  set  on  fire  at  any  time  at  which  the 
clock  might  be  set. 


Colonel  Thomas  B.  Farley,  when  he  occu-|  The  nine  hundred  armed  men,  of  whom 
pied  that  post.  Governor  Morton  T  proba-  j  I  have  spoken,  that  were  in  Dr.  Bowies' 
bly  met  two  or  three  times,  and  communica- 1  county,  were  all  amenable  to  the  officers  of 
ted  to  him  what  I  knew.  My  reports  to  |  the  order ;  and  though  some  of  them  had  only 
General  Carrington  were  sometimes  writ- (been  initiated  into  the  Order  of  American 
ten  and  sometimes  given  in  person.  I  was  I  Knights,  they  were  amenable  to  the  officers 
entirely  free  and  confidential  in  my  com- j  of  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty.  Those 
munications  with  the  General,  and  as  a  gen-  members  of  the  Order  of  American  Knights 


eral  thing  he  left  me  entirely  to  my  own 
discretion,  as  to  the  course  I  should  adopt 
in  my  investigations.  The  man  named 
Dickerson,  referred  to  in  my  direct  exam 
ination,  Bowles  told  me,  lived  in  Baltimore, 


who  had  only  taken  the  first  or  vestibule 
degree,  and  were  armed,  were  counted  on 
in  case  of  necessity.  I  was  requested  by 
Judge  Bullitt,  Dr.  Kalfus,  Mr.  Thomas  and 
other  members  of  the  order,  to  organize  the 


and  that  he  went  to  Richmond  at  his  I  order  as  fast  as  possible ;  they  furnished  me 
pleasure.  Bowles  also  told  me.  that  he  j  with  money  to  pay  my  traveling  expenses, 
had  received  a  letter  from  Dickerson,  who  They  also  sent  me  down  the  Nashville  Rail- 


was  just  home  from  Richmond.  He  wan 
ted  to  know  how  many  men  Kentucky 
would  give.  I  told  him  probably  forty, 
fifty,  or  sixty  thousand  men ;  as  it  was  a 
revolutionary  State,  I  thought  she  would 
furnish  that  number  to  assist  in  the  design 
he  was  speaking  of,  namely,  revolution  in 
the  North  and  assisting  the  South, 

The  last  conversation  I  had  with  Dr. 
Bowles  was  about  the  6th  or  7th  of  August, 
when  I  was  at  his  house  with  the  pro 
gramme  which  I  got  from  Dodd.  He  re 
marked  that  Dodd  had  no  right  to  change 
the  programme;  that  they  should  have 
awaited  the  action  of  the  rebel  forces; 
but  finally  he  determined  that  they  would 
act  without  the  co-operation  of  the  rebels, 
if  they  could  not  get  it.  Bowles  told  me  he 
had  received  notice  of  the  change.  That 
was  the  time  I  met  Dodd's  son  returning 
from  Bowies'  house,  and  Bowles  told  me  he 
had  been  there. 

"When  Milligan's  name  was  called  as  a 
Major  General,  he  made  no  particular  re 
sponse,  and  he  made  no  objection  that  I 
heard ;  the  list  was  called  by  the  Grand 
Commander.  The  Council  at  Chicago,  at 
which  Dr.  Bowles  was  present,  was  about 
the  20th  of  July.  I  do  not  know  whether 
Mr.  Milligan  was  present  or  not.  The 
meeting  at  Hamilton,  at  which  Mr.  Milli 
gan  was  present,  was  a  Democratic  mass 
meeting  to  nominate  delegates  to  the  Chi 
cago  Convention.  Bowles,  Dodd,  Milligan 
and  myself  went  on  the  same  train  to 
Hamilton,  but  I  had  no  conversation  at  all 
with  him. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

At  the  meeting  of  Bowles,  Kalfus  and 
others  at  Bocking's  room,  at  the  Louisville 
Hotel,  Louisville,  Bocking  explained,  but 
did  not  exhibit,  some  kind  of  clock  ma- 


road  to  learn  the  position  of  the  Federal 
troops,  and  the  number  of  guns  on  that 
Railroad  at  different  points.  I  went  down 
as  far  as  Bowling  Green. 

Colonel  WARNER,  a  witness  for  the  Gov 
ernment,  was  then  introduced,  and  being 
duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified 
as  follows : 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate : 

State  your  nameand  theposition  you  hold? 

Answer.  A.  J.  Warner,  Colonel  of  the  17th 
V.  R.  C.,  and  Commander  of  the  Post  at  In 
dianapolis. 

Q.  State  to  the  Court  where  you  met  with 
that  letter? 

[The  Judge  Advocate  here  handed  to  the 
witness  a  letter  marked  Government  Ex 
hibit  "N."] 

A.  This  letter  was  taken  by  me  among 
other  papers  from  the  office  of  Mr.  H.  IL  Dodd, 
at  the  time  the  arms  were  seized.  This 
letter  was  found  either  in  the  safe  or  desk, 
I  am  not  certain  which.  I  recognize  it  es 
pecially  by  the  signature,  and  some  words 
which  I  could  not  make  out. 

Q.  In  what  capacity  were  you  acting,  and 
under  what  orders,  when  you  seized  those 
papers  ? 

A.  On  Saturday  evening,  I  believe  about 
the  20th  of  August,  I  received  information 
that  a  lot  of  arms  had  been  shipped  secretly 
to  this  place,  and  had  come  to  the  Bellefon- 
taine  Depot.  I  immediately,  in  the  absence 
of  the  District  Commander,  ordered  the 
Provost  Marshal  of  the  Post  to  seize  the 
arms,  and  arrest  all  parties  known  to  be 
connected  with  the  transaction.  From  the 
time  I  first  heard  of  the  shipment  of  those 
arms  to  the  time  the  Provost  Marshal 
reached  the  depot  with  wagons,  etc.,  they 
had  been  removed  to  the  old  Sentinel 
building.  That  night,  I  think,  twenty-six 
boxes  of  arms  and  ammunition  were  taken. 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


119 


Q.  State  what  those  boxes  contained,  and       ELLIOTT  ROBERTSON,  a  witness  for  the  Gov- 


how  they  were  marked  ? 


ernment,  was  then   introduced,  and  being 


A.  The  boxes  were  shipped  to  J.  J.  Par-!  duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified 
sons.  On  the  way-bill  they  were  marked;  as  follows: 
"Stationery,"  I  think.  On  some  of  them  I  am  a  farmer,  and  live  in  Randolph 
there  were  marks  indicating  that  they  were  county,  Indiana.  I  became  a  member  of 
Sunday  School  books,  or  tracts.  Twenty-four  i  the  organization  called  the  Golden  Circle, 
or  twenty-six  boxes  contained  fixed  ammu-  in  the  spring  of  1863,  in  Greenfork  town- 
nition  for  large  sized  revolvers;  the  balance  ship,  Randolph  county;  our  place  of  meet- 


contained  large  sized  revolvers.     They  were 
self-cocking;  and  were  the  largest  sized  re 


volvers  I  have  ever  seen. 

Q.   What  was  done  with  those  arms? 


tion,  in  the  United  States  arsenal. 
Q.   How  many  arms  were  there? 


ing  was  in  the  woods;  we  met  at  night,  and 
about  fifteen  or  twenty  persons  were 


pres 
ent.  John  D.  Burkebile  initiated  me.  There 
were  between  sixty  and  seventy-five  mem- 

A.  They  were  taken  possession  of  by  me,  ]  bers  in    our  township ;  among   them    I  re- 
and  are  now  deposited,  with  the  ammuni-  member  Nathan  Brown,  John  D.  Burkebile, 

Henry    Robbins,    Augustus    Bunch,    John 
Fudge,    Abraham    Platt,    Henry    Wooden, 


A.  Between  three  hundred  and  fifty  and  Amos  Cren,  Francis  Durvidge.  Burkebilo 
four  hundred  revolvers.  The  boxes  con- j  was  Captain,  Amos  Cren  Lieutenant,  Henry 
tained  mostly  ammunition.  i  Wooden  Sergeant,  and  Eli  Thomas  In- 


Q.   Did  you  find  any  others  ? 


spector.     The  Captain  and  Lieutenant  were 


A.  On  Sunday  morning  I  went  down  my-  appointed  by  the  members  of  the  order; 
self  to  make  a  thorough  search  of  the  build-  i  the  Sergeant  was  appointed  by  the  Captain, 
ing,  and  (bund  secreted  in  the  office  or  room  j  A  week  after  I  was  initiated,  I  appointed  a 
occupied  by  H.  H.  Dodd,  under  books 'and  I  meeting  of  the  order  in  Washington  town- 
stationery,  six  more  boxes,  making  in  all  ship;  a  part  of  the  members  of  Greeni'ork 


thirty-two  boxes. 

Q.   What  did  those  six  boxes  contain  ? 


township  were  present ;  Daniel  Barnes  pre 
sided,    and    some   four   or   five    additional 


A.  Part  of  them  contained  arms,  and  part !  members  were  initiated.  From  the  time  I 
ammunition ;  of  the  same  description  as  j  was  initiated,  to  September  or  October,  I 
those  taken  on  Saturday  night.  Upon  find- 1  mostly  met  with  them  once  a  week.  Tho 
ing  those  arms  there,  I  concluded  to  look  j  members  of  the  order  were  ordered  to  drill; 
further  and  see  what  papers  I  could  find  re-  but  1  did  not.  One  Sunday  I  met  the  Cap- 
la  ting  to  them,  to  see  what  parties  were  im 
plicated  ;  consequently  a  search  was  made 
in  the  desk  and  safe  in  the  room  occupied 
by  Dodd:  A  search  was  made  in  other 
rooms  in  the  building  also. 


Q.  State  whether  this  instrument  was 
found  there? 

[A  stamping  press  was  here  handed  to 
the  witness.] 

A.  This  was  found  in  the  room  said  to 
have  been  occupied  by  the  Grand  Secretary 
of  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty,  together 
with  about  two  bushels,  or  more,  of  rituals, 
constitutions,  etc.,  of  the  order.  Also,  a 
roll  of  the  members  of  the  order  in  this 
city,  and  papers  relating  to  the  order. 
There  were  also  blanks,  note  books  and 
orders,  some  of  them  printed,  and  others 
stamped. 

Q.  You  may  state  to  the  Court  whether 
you  recognize  that  letter. 

[A  letter  bearing  date  May  12,  1864,  was 
here  handed  to  the  witness.] 

A.  This  letter  was  also  taken  from  the 
office  of  IT.  II.  Dodd;  but  I  do  not  remem 
ber  whether  from  his  safe  or  desk.  Part  of 
the  letters  were  found  in  his  desk  rolled  up 
in  bundles,  and  part  were  taken  ^from  a 
little  drawer  in  the  safe. 

[The  letter  was  here  offered  in  evidence 
by  the  Judge  Advocate.*] 


*  WINDSOR,  CANADA  W.,  May  12, 1864. 
PEAK  SIR:  Your   letters.     Am    waiting   to   hear  from 
jou  at  Dayton  as  to   time  of  tho  District  Convention. 


tain,  who  asked  me  why  I  did  not  attend 
drill ;  he  said  I  should  have  gone,  for  they 
had  had  some  good  sport.  About  one-half 
the  members  were  armed;  revolvers  were 
the  principal  arms.  I  heard  from  the  mem 
bers  of  the  order  that  they  drilled  every 
week  or  two.  So  far  as  I  learned,  the  QJ>^ 
ject  of  the  order  was  to  oppose  the  Admin 
istration  in  putting  down  the  rebellion,  and 
in  making  arbitrary  arrests;  this  was  to  be 
done  by  force  of  arms;  but  exactly  how  it- 
was  to  be  done,  had  not  been  decided.  The 
information  I  got  from  the  Captain,  was 
that  the  members  of  the  township  were  to 
compose  the  company;  we  were  to  act  in 
squads,  under  the  direction  of  the  Captain, 
in  case  the  guerrilla  mode  of  warfare  wan 
adopted.  We  were  to  take  up  arms  and 
resist  the  enforcement  of  the  draft.  This, 
I  understood,  had  been  decided  by  the  au 
thorities  here  in  Indianapolis.  The  Captain 
and  Nathan  Brown  spoke  of  the  State  being 
divided  into  four  military  districts;  and 
that  a  man  by  the  name  of  Milligan  corn- 
No  Announcement  yet.  Will  give  you  notice  immedi 
ately. 

&JT  Send  for  your  friend  here  to  return  at  once  and 
work  at  home.  Nothing  to  do  here.  So,  also,  eays  our 
mutual  friend.  Be  ready  for  Dayton  meeting. 

Grant  has  been  worsted  by  Lee,  and  no  mistake.  It  IM 
Grat,t  who  has  fallen  back  six  or  eight  miles,  and  not  L.. 
who  has  advanced  from  west  to  east.  L.  is  not,  and 
never  has  been,  facing  northward,  but  eastward. 

Truly,  C.  L.  V. 

Sherman,  too,  has  been  brought  to  a  doad  stand,  first 
having  been  driven  back. 


120 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


manded  our  district.  I  know  of  members 
of  the  order  having  assembled  to  resist  ar 
rests.  Burkebile,  our  Captain,  expected  to 
be  arrested,  and  he  called  a  meeting  of  the 
members.  I  had  notice  to  go  to  his  house, 
with  other  members,  to  prevent  his  arrest, 
in  case  it  was  attempted.  I  was  at  his 
house  two  nights;  four  or  five  others  were 
there;  among  them  Burkebile' s  two  boys, 
Henry  Bobbins,  Henry  Wooden,  John 
Fudge,  and  John  L.  Mack.  Some  were 
armed  with  revolvers,  and  two  of  them  with 
shot-guns.  Our  instructions  were  to  resist 
the  authorities,  and  not  to  let  them  take 
our  Captain.  John  D.  Burkebile  induced 
me  to  join  the  order;  he  said  it  was  an  or 
ganization  for  self-protection  among  the 
Democrats.  He  did  not  at  first  give  me  the 
name  of  the  order.  A  meeting  was  ap 
pointed  to  take  place  on  the  next  Thurs 
day,  and  I  went  and  was  initiated.  The 
last  meeting  I  attended  was  in  September 
or  October,  1863.  About  that  time  they 
changed  their  name,  and  were  called  the 
Order  of  American  Knights.  They  did  not 
change  their  plans  or  principles,  that  I 
know  of;  I  did  not  take  any  new  obligation, 
but  was  instructed  in  the  change  by  the 
Captain.  I  attended  one  meeting  of  the 
American  Knights  in  Preble  county,  Ohio, 
about  August,  1864;  the  password  by  which 
we  entered,  was  "Liberty."  I  learned  of 
the  change  of  name  to  the  Order  of  Amer 
ican  Knights  from  the  Captain.  Nathan 
Brown  was  sent  to  Indianapolis  in  Septem 
ber,  1863,  to  represent  our  township,  and 
when  he  came  back  the  change  was  made. 
He  called  a  meeting,  and  the  Captain 
wished  me  to  go  into  the  new  order;  I  told 
him  I  would  have  a  few  days  to  study  over 
it;  he  insisted,  and  told  me  it  was  a  nice 
thing,  but  1  would  not  go  into  it. 

The  signs  by  which  members  recognized 
each  other,  are  these:  You  pass  the  right 
hand  down  over  the  mouth  and  beard,  with 
the^f ore-finger  of  the  right  hand  down  the 
right  side  of  the  nose.  If  the  man  you  are 
testing  is  a  member,  he  will  reply  by  taking 
the  lobe  of  the  left  ear  with  the  left  hand 
between  the  thumb  and  finger,  and  draw  it 
down.  You  then  take  a  grTp,  and  give  one 
shake  of  the  hand,  with  the  fore-finger  run 
ning  up  the  wrist  as  far  as  possible.  They 
had  some  military  signs,  which,  we  were  told, 
would  protect  us  in  case  of  battle,  or  being 
taken  prisoner.  The  hands  were  clasped  in 
front,  and  raised  over  the  head,  in  which 
position  you  stood  a  few  minutes,  or  till  the 
sign  was  recognized;  the  answer  to  this 
sign  being  made  by  placing  the  hands,  with 
the  tips  of  the  fingers  resting  on  the  shoul 
ders.  There  was  another  sign,  which  con 
sisted  in  writing  the  number  thirty-three  on 
a  piece  of  paper,  which,  being  handed  to  a 
member,  signified  that  he  who  used  it  was 
in  danger. 


from  the  authorities  at  Indianapolis.  It 
was  stated  that  Beck  &  Bros,  had  agreed  to 
furnish  arms.  Nathan  Brown  and  Burkebile 
were  sent  as  representatives  to  a  conven 
tion  at  Indianapolis,  in  the  latter  part  of 
July,  1863.  The  Captain,  on  his  return, 
stated,  as  I  understood,  that  most  of  the 
States,  including  the  rebel  States,  were  re 
presented;  and  he  also  said  that  they  had 
not  concluded  what  was  to  be  done  in  case 
of  a  draft.  I  entered  the  order  in  good 
faith,  but  I  left  it  because  I  thought  it 
was  disloyal.  I  first  reported  the  order 
to  'Squire  Hough,  I  think,  in  October, 
1863. 

HENRY  L.  ZUMRO.  a  witness  for  the  Gov 
ernment,  was  then  introduced,  and  being 
duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testi 
fied  as  follows:  

I  reside  at  Markle,  Huntington  county,  j 
Indiana,  and  am  a  practicing  physician; 
have  resided  there  ten  years.  I  became 
a  member  of  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Lib 
erty  on  the  20th  of  July  last,  at  the  so 
licitation  of  Dr.  Horton,  directly  through 
Mr.  Hantz.  Dr.  Horton  was  said  to  be  a 
member.  I  was  initiated  in  the  first  de 
gree  in  Isaac  Decker's  barn;  at  the  same 
time  there  were  initiated  John  Hantz,  Isaac 
Decker,  Edward  Decker,  William  Decker, 
Daniel  Highland,  Adam  Young,  Edward 
Johnson,  Joseph  Johnson,  William  Lever, 
Nathan  Johnson,  William  Hantz,  and  Wil 
liam  Cashman ;  fourteen  were  initiated  by 
Dr.  Horton.  The  society  numbered  in 
that  township  between  forty  and  fifty. 
John  Hantz  was  Grand  Seignior;  Isaac 
Decker,  Treasurer;  Joseph  Johnson,  O.  G.; 
Nathan  Johnson,  G.  D.;  Daniel  Highland, 
G.  M.;  William  Decker,  G.  S.;  Henry  John 
son,  A.  D.;  I  was  Secretary.  [The  witness 
was  unable  to  explain  the  initials.]  The 
obligation  I  took  was  that  of  the  first  de 
gree  of  the  Order  of  American  Knights. 
Dr.  Horton  told  me  that  there  were  from 
eighty  to  one  hundred  thousand  members 
of  the  order  in  this  State.  I  understood 
there  was  a  military  organization  connectgd^ 
with  the  order.  We  got  up  a  constitution  ~"~] 
and  organized  a  company  of  about  forty  ; 
members.  David  Lash  was  Captain ;  Joseph 
Johnson,  First  Lieutenant;  Henry  John 
son,  Second  Lieutenant ;  Isaac  Miller,  Or 
derly;  there  were  none  bufTtiembers  of 
the  order  in  this  company;  it  did  not  com 
prise  all  the  members  of  the  order  in  that 
township;  some  were  aged,  and  these  we 
did  not  consider  good  fighting  material; 
but  all  that  wer*e  considered  able  were  in 
that  company.  I  did  not  know  of  our  com 
pany  drilling.  At  Bluffton,  Wells  county, 
they  drilled;  I  went  to  see  them  drill; 
that  was  in  the  early  part  of  September,  in 
this  year  ;  some  forty  to  sixty  were  drilling 
on  the  commons  back  of  Blufl'ton.  Some 
of  the  members  of  our  company  were 


I  understood  that  the  arms  were  procured  I  members  of  the  Bluft'ton  company  ;  that  is 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


121 


how  I  come  to  know  that  the  Bluffton  com 
pany  belonged  to  the  order. 

After  Dr.  Horton  initiated  us,  he  told  us 
that  the  object  of  the  order  was  to  subdue 
the  Abolitionists,  resist  the  draft,  and  to  assist 
the  Southern  Confederacy.  I  heard  of  the 
contemplated  uprising  of  the  order,  but 
learned  nothing  definite  with  regard  to  it. 
I  attended,  perhaps,  ten  or  twelve  meetings 
of  the  order.  After  Huntington  county 
was  drafted,  a  meeting  of  the  order  was 
held,  and  a  committee  sent  to  Bluffton, 
and  one  to  Huntington,  to  ascertain  if  there 
was  a  concert  of  action  in  regard  to  resist 
ing  the  draft;  Jacob  Parting  was  the  com 
mittee  to  Bluffton,  and  I  was  appointed 
the  committee  to  Huntington.  At  Hun 
tington  I  saw  Mr.  Cummings;  he  could  not 
tell  me  any  thing  about  it,  and  the  Sheriff 
referred  me  to  Mr.  Milligan,  whom  I  saw 
about  the  16th  of  September  last.  I  was 
instructed  to  ascertain  if  there  was  a  con 
cert  of  action,  and  if  so,  what  arrange 
ments  were  to  be  made  to  resist  the  draft. 
I  asked  Mr.  Milligan  his  opinion  as  to 
whether  we  had  better  resist  or  not;  he 
said  it  was  as  good  a  time  now  as  any  to  re 
sist.  I  did  not  know  that  Mr.  Milligan 
held  any  military  position  in  the  order; 
the  Sheriff  referred  me  to  him  because  he 
was  the -leading  man  there,  and  he  would 
know.  His  message  I  brought  back  to  the 
order,  but  as  there  was  no  concert  of  ac 
tion,  the  members  felt  somewhat  disap 
pointed,  and  took  the  papers  of  the  order 
into  Decker's  barn  yard  and  burnt  them. 
The  order  was  disbanded  about  the  17th 
of  September,  when  we  found  the  thing 
was  a  failure ;  and  we  agreed  not  to  meet 

,  any  more.  On  the  same  day  that  I  saw 
Mr.  Milligan,  I  also  saw  Mr.  Winters,  the 

i.  editor  of  the  Huntington  Democrat,  who,  1 
believe,  was  a  member  of  the  order.  I  asked 
him  the  question  that  I  had  put  to  Mr. 
Milligan,  and  he  advised  resistance. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Friday,  November  4,  at  10  o'clock,  A.  M. 

COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         ") 
November  4,  1864,  10  o'clock,  A.  M.  J 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  ad 
journment. 

All  the  members  present.  Also,  the  Judge 
Advocate,  the  accused  and  their  counsel. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

H.  L.  ZUMRO,  a  witness  for  the  Govern 
ment,  proceeded  with  his  testimony  as  fol 
lows  : 

In  my  conversation  with  Mr.  Milligan,  on 
my  visit  to  him,  as  a  committee  sent  to 
Huntington,  after  advising  resistance,  he 
said,  that  if  he  was  well,  and  in  the  woods, 
he  could  kill  twenty  men  himself  before 
he  would  be  taken.  When  I  asked  him  in 
what  way  we  should  resist,  he  concluded 
that  we  should  form  in  companies  or 
squads,  just  as  we  could;  that  ten  men 


would  be  sufficient  to  start  with  in  resist 
ing  the  draft,  and  in  resistance  to  the  Ad 
ministration.  Shortly  after  I  was  arrested, 
I  had  a  conversation  with  Mr.  Milligan  in 
reference  to  my  own  arrest;  he  thought  it 
was  a  bad  thing  to  be  arrested  as  I  had 
been,  and  he  said  if  a  man  were  to  arrest 
him,  he  would  kill  him,  even  if  he  had  to 
go  forty  miles  to  do  it.  Something  was 
said,  in  the  conversation  as  to  whether  we 
should  need  horses  in  this  resistance,  when 
|  Mr.  Milligan  said  that  we  should  ;  that  we 
might  find  it  necessary  sometimes  to  assist 
a  squad  ten,  fifteen,  or  twenty  miles  dis 
tant,  and  should  need  horses  to  do  it. 

I  came  to  join  the  order  from  a  conversa 
tion  I  had  in  the  early  part  of  March,  with 
Colonel  James  R.  Slack,  of  the  47th  Indiana, 
in  his  office;  he  resides  in  Huntingdon.  He 
asked  me  if  there  was  not  a  secret  organiza 
tion  in  our  neighborhood ;  I  told  him  there 
was.  He  then  wanted  to  know  if  I  could 
not  get  the  secrets  of  it ;  and  said  they  were 
not  Democrats,  but  a  set  of  traitors  who 
would  undermine  the  Government.  He 
wished  to  know  if  I  would  not  go  into  the 
matter  to  find  out  their  purposes,  and  to  aid 
in  keeping  down  this  strife.  I  told  him 
that  I  could,  but  I  did  not  think  it  would 
be  prudent  to  do  it,  from  the  fact  that  my 
practice  was  here;  and  if  at  any  time  it 
should  be  found  out  that  I  had  been  opera- 
tingin  favorof  the  Government,  in  all  proba 
bility  they  would  endeavor  to  injure  me. 
He  said  there  was  no  danger  at  all,  from 
the  fact  that  the  loyal  portion  of  the 
Democratic  party  would  only  think  the 
better  or  me;  and  that  the  traitors  to 
this  Government  would  go  down  so  that 
there  would  not  be  enough  left  to  make 
a  boot  black  ;  that  was  just  his  language. 
He  afterward  had  a  conversation"  with 
Colonel  Schuler  and  Governor  Morton,  and 
Colonel  Schuler  came  up  and  induced  me 
to  operate  in  that  way.  My  purpose  in 
joining  the  order  was  to  endeavor  to  keep 
down  any  treasonable  uprising.  My  subse 
quent  operations  I  reported  from  time  to 
time  to  General  Carrington. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

No  inducements  have  been  held  out  to 
me  to  testify  in  this  case.  I  was  arrested 
by  order  of  General  Carrington,  and  placed 
under  bonds ;  but  this  was  simply  a  pretense 
on  the  part  of  the  authorities.  After  I  was 
placed  under  arrest,  and  before  I  reported 
at  Indianapolis,  I  went  to  Mr.  Milligan  to 
consult  him  in  reference  to  my  arrest,  and 
I  stated  to  Mr.  Coffroth,  a  counsel,  when  I 
met  him  at  Peru,  that  I  might  employ  Mr. 
Milligan  to  assist  in  my  defense.  I  made 
application  to  be  admitted  a  member  of  the 
order  at  Huntington  at  different  times.  ] 
joined  the  order  at  Rockcreek  township. 
I  was  solicited  by  Mr.  Milligan's  student  to 
go  into  the  temple. 


122 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


At  the  time  I  called  to  see  Mr.  Milligan 
on  the  16th  of  September,  Mr.  Joseph  John 
son  went  with  me.  Mr.  Johnson  was  present 
during  the  whole  of  the  conversation  I  had 
with  Mr.  Milligan.  Mr.  Johnson  lives  in 
Rockcreek  township.  He  is  the  Joseph 
Johnson,  0.  G.,  I  referred  to  as  being 
initiated  at  the  time  I  was.  Mr.  Milligan 
was  sick  in  bed,  and  I  understood  he  had 
been  for  a  considerable  time  under  the  in 
fluence  of  opium  and  mercury,  and  he  wished 
me  to  see  if  any  effect  was  being  produced 
by  the  opium  and  mercury.  After  my  con 
versation  with  Milligan,  I  said  I  thought  it 
worried  him;  he  told  me  that  it  did;  and  I 
replied  that  I  would  then  say  nothing 
further.  I  do  not  think  Mr.  Milligan  was 
at  the  time  under  the  influence  of  narcotics, 
or  opium.  I  next  visited  Mr.  Day,  to  whom 
I  was  referred  by  Mr.  Milligan.  I  told  Mr. 
Day  that  Milligan  had  advised  resistance, 
but  said  that  he  was  so  sick  I  did  not  like 
to  say  a  great  deal  to  him.  Mr.  Day  said  it 
would  be  foolish  to  resist.  I  asked  him  as 
I  had  Mr.  Milligan,  if  there  was  to  be  any 
concert  of  action,  and  if  so,  that  we  were 
ready  to  resist  in  our  township.  Mr.  Sam 
uel  Winters  and  Mr.  Reinbarger  were  pres 
ent  during  my  conversation  with  Mr.  Day. 
I  remember  Milligan  saying,  when  I  asked 
him  if  they  were  going  to  resist,  that  they 
had  no  fighting  men  there ;  that  there  were 
only  five  or  six  fighting  men  in  Huntington. 
I  might  have  spoken  also,  but  Mr.  Ibach 
and  I  also  called  at  Mr.  Coflroth's  office.  I 
called  at  Mr.  Coffroth's  office  at  the  instance 
of  Mr.  Johnson,  who  wanted  to  know  what 
was  his  opinion  about  resistance.  Mr.Cof- 
froth  said  he  was  not  a  member  of  the  or-  J 
der,  and  would  not  advise  resistance  in  any 
way.  I  did  not  go  to  Mr.  Coffroth  to  act  as  ' 
a  spy  upon  him,  but  simply  because  Mr. 
Johnson  said  he  was  an  influential  Demo 
crat,  and  he  would  like  to  know  his  opinion. 

When  Dr.  Harden  stated  that  the  objects 
of  the  order  were  to  oppose  the  Administra 
tion,  resist  the  draft,  and  assist  the  South 
ern  Confederacy,  there  were  present  John 
Hantz,  Isaac  Decker,  Edward  Decker,  Wil 
liam  Decker,  Daniel  Highland,  Adam 
Young,  Henry  Johnson,  Joseph  Johnson, 
Nathan  Johnson,  Wm.  Hantz,  Wm.  Cushman, 
and  myself.  The  memorandum  to  which  I 
refer  for  these  names,  I  made  at  the  time. 

The  date  of  the  meeting  at  which  I  was 
appointed  as  a  committee  to  go  to  Hunting- 
ton,  and  Jacob  Farling  to  go  to  Bluffton, 
was  on  the  14th  of  September.  Among 
those  who  were  present  at  the  meeting  of 
the  14th  of  September,  were  Mr.  Farling, 
Joseph  Johnson,  Mr.  Eders  and  others.  Mr. 
Johnson  was  present  at  my  appointment, 
and  agreed  to  go  with  me.  David  Lash, 
who  was  the  Captain  of  our  company,  is 
the  brother  of  the  merchant  of  that  name, 
and  is  a  carpenter.  Though  Mr.  Winters 
and  Mr.  Reinbarger  advised  resistance,  and 


Mr.  Miiligan  said  it  was  as  good  a  time  as  any 
to  resist,  I  reported  that  there  would  be  no 
concert  of  action;  and  the  consequence  wa£ 
that  the  papers  of  the  order  were  burned. 
When  it  came  to  the  test,  the  order  fa-iled. 

My  purpose  in  going  into  the  order  was 
not  to  betray  its  members,  but  to  keep  the 
Government  posted  as  to  their  designs. 
There  appeared  to  be  a  great  danger  of  an 
outbreak  and  rebellion  at  home,  and  I 
thought  if  I  could  do  any  thing  to  prevent 
it,  I  was  doing  the  community  a  kindness, 
and  not  injury. 

I  consulted  with  Esq.  Bratton,  but  he 
knew  my  position  with  reference  to  the 
order;  it  was  he  who  arrested  me  and 
brought  me  from  Markle. 

I  never  told  any  one  that  Mr.  Milligan 
could  be  got  clear  or  convicted  for  money  ; 
but  a  person  who,  1  understood,  was  a  friend 
of  Mr.  Milligan,  wanted  to  know  of  me,  if 
he  could  be  got  away  from  the  guards.  The 
idea  that  I  held  out  was,  that  I  thought  he 
could  be.  My  impression  was  that  they 
wanted  to  bribe  the  guards,  but  I  do  not  know 
from  whom  I  got  the  idea.  But  I  never 
stated  to  any  one,  that  if  I  was  furnished 
with  money,  I  could  or  would  use  it  secretly 
for  the  benefit  of  Mr.  Milligan,  either  upon 
officers  or  members  of  the  guard. 

The  statement  of  Mr.  Milligan,  that  if  he 
was  well  and  in  the  woods,  he  could  kill 
twenty  men  before  he  was  taken,  and  also 
the  statement  that  ten  men  would  be  suffic 
ient  to  start  with,  were  made  in  the  pres 
ence  of  Joseph  Johnson. 

The  military  company  connected  with  this 
order  was  organized  perhaps  three  or  four 
weeks  before  we  abandoned  the  order,  which 
was  about  themiddle  or  latter  end  of  August, 
and  after  the  organization  had  been  ex 
posed  in  the  papers  at  Indianapolis.  The 
organization  in  our  township  was  not  un 
derstood  to  be  an  independent  order,  but 
was  connected  with  the  order  generally, 
and  we  were  to  co-operate  with  them  in  any 
outbreak  or  resistance  to  the  Government 
When  I  called  on  Mr.  Milligan,  I  did 
know  him  to  be  a  member  of  the  order. 
I  represented  to  Milligan  that  I  had  been 
arrested  at  the  instigation  of  Dr.  Scott,  who, 
I  represented,  had  been  actuated  by  motive* 
of  rivalry,  so  as  to  get  me  out  of  the 
way  as  a  practicing  physician,  and  it  was  in 
this  connection  that  Mr.  Milligan  said,  if 
he  had  been  arrested  at  the  instigation  of 
any  one  governed  by  such  motives,  that  he 
would  go  forty  miles  to  kill  the  man. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
at  2  o'clock,  P.  M. 

AFTERNOON    SESSION. 

COUBT  BOOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         ) 
November  4, 1864,  2  o'clock,  P.  M.  ) 

The   Commission    met    pursuant   to   ad 
journment. 
All    the    members    present.      Also,   the 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


123 


Judge  Advocate,  the  accused,  and  their 
counsel. 

The  Judge  Advocate  here  stated  that  all 
proceedings  against  Colonel  Horace  Heffren 
were  withdrawn  on  the  part  of  the  Govern 
ment;  that  he  was  released  from  arrest  by 
the  proper  authorities,  and  that  he  would 
now  appear  on  the  stand  as  a  witness  for 
the  Government. 

HORACE  HEFKREN,  a  witness  for  the  Gov 
ernment,  was  then  called  to  the  stand,  and 
duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  said  that 
when  the  accused  were  jointly  indicted,  as 
in  this  instance,  it  was  not  competent  for 
an  accused  to  testify  either  for  the  defense 
or  prosecution,  till  a  verdict  of  "not  guilty" 
has  been  entered. 

The  Judge  Advocate,  in  reply,  said: 

The  Government  can  at  any  time,  or  at 
any  stage  of  the  proceedings,  quash  any  set 
of  charges  and  specifications  against  the 
accused,  when  the  interests  of  the  service 
may  seem  to  demand  it,  and  with  that  is  an 
end  of  the  case.  When  the  Judge  Advo 
cate  says  to  the  accused,  the  Government 
withdraws  its  charges  and  specifications 
against  you,  the  man  is  then  free,  without 
any  proceeding  pending  against  him.  As 
to  this  Commission  giving  a  verdict  of  ac 
quittal,  or  proceeding  to  a  finding  before 
this  witness  can  be  used,  let  me  say  that 
no  such  rule  can  obtain.  It  makes  the 
finding,  and  passes  its  sentence  in  any  given 
case;  the  proceedings  are  then  forwarded 
to  the  Commanding  General  convening  the 
Court,  for  his  approval  and  confirmation,  or 
disapproval.  If  it  is  a  case  in  which  he  has 
the  power  to  execute  the  sentence,  it  is 
then  promulgated  in  general  orders  and 
made  known  to  the  accused  and  to  the 
world.  If  it  is  a  case  which  the  Command 
ing  General  has  not  the  power  to  execute, 
he  adds  his  approval  or  disapproval,  as  the 
case  may  be,  and  forwards  it  to  the  proper 
authority  for  approval,  and  after  being  acted 
upon  by  that  authority,  it  is  made  known. 
In  this  case,  for  instance,  the  proceedings 
would  probably  have  to  go  to  the  President 
of  the  United  States,  and  be  delayed  per 
haps  for  months. 

The  very  nature  and  constitution  of  a 
military  court,  precludes  the  possibility  of 
the  existence  of  any  such  a  rule  in  this 
Court. 

The  witness,  Horace  Heffren,  then  testi 
fied  as  follows : 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate: 

Please  state  your  name,  place  of  resi 
dence,  and  business. 

Answer.  My  name  is  Horace  Heffren; 
residence,  Salem,  Washington  county,  Indi 
ana;  my  profession,  that  of  an  attorney; 
my  office  is  at  Salem. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  resided  there  ? 

A.  Since  March,  1857. 

Q.  Please  state  to  the  Court  whether  you 


ever  joined  an  order  called  American 
Knights,  or  Order  of  Sons  of  Liberty;  if  so, 
when  and  where  ? 

A.  I  joined  an  order  called  American 
Knights,  somewhere  in  the  latter  part  of 
the  year  1863,  probably  in  November  or 
December.  I  have  no  means  of  telling  the 
precise  time.  I  have  not  my  diary  of  last 
year  with  me;  if  I  had,  I  could  tell  the 
precise  day. 

Q.  Did  you  belong  to  any  similar  order, 
or  one  with  similar  intents  and  purposes,  of 
'a  different  name,  previous  to  that? 

A.  I  did  not. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  belong  to  the  Golden 
Circle? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  belong  to  the  Freemasons, 
but  to  no  other  secret  order. 

Q.  At  whose  solicitation  did  you  join  the 
order? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  I  can  say  it  was  at 
the  solicitation  of  any  person.  Mr.  Bailey, 
of  Terre  Haute,  came  to  Salem;  I  knew  his 
face  and  recognized  him,  but  could  not  call 
his  name;  he  told  me  what  his  business 
was,  and  I  got  twelve  more  men  beside 
myself,  and  we  were  taken  into  the  Order 
of  American  Knights  in  my  office. 

Q.  Who  initiated  you? 

A.  Mr.  Bailey. 

Q.   Where  does  he  reside  now? 

A.  I  understand  he  is  dead ;  I  have  made 
inquiries  since  I  have  been  in  prison,  and 
that  is  what  I  am  told. 

Q.  Who  else  were  initiated  at  that  time? 

A.  James  B.  Wilson,  William  C.  McCoskey, 
Town  send  Cutshaw,  Deloss  Heflren,  Eli 
Bouser,  William  P.  Green,  and  John  B. 
Pitts,  I  think — I  am  not  certain  about  him; 
these  are  as  far  as  I  recollect  now. 

Q.  What  was  the  first  lodge  or  county 
temple  you  attended  after  your  initiation? 

A.  In  order  to  make  my  story  connected, 
I  must  explain.  After  we  had  taken  the 
three  degrees,  I  was  elected  Grand  Seignior 
of  the  County  Temple,  James  B.  Wilson 
Ancient  Brother,  W.  C.  McCoskey  as  Secre 
tary,  and  Townsend  Cutshaw  as  Treasurer. 
The  lodge  was  in  my  office,  in  the  town  of 
Salem. 

Q.  When  did  you  take  the  first,  second 
and  third  degrees? 

A.  I  took  the  three  degrees  that  very 
night. 

Q.  When  did  you  next  attend  a  county 
temple? 

A.  There  never  was  but  one  county  tem 
ple  after  that,  in  our  county,  to  my  knowl 
edge;  and  that  was  for  the  election  after 
my  time  was  up,  and  that  was  not  far  fronj 
the  22d  of  February,  1864.  I  was  instructed 
that  there  was  to  be  a  meeting  on  the  16th 
and  17th  of  February,  and  that,  as  Grand 
Seignior,  I  was  the  delegate  from  the  county 
temple.  I  came  here  and  attended  the 
meetings  of  the  16th  and  17th;  when  there, 
I  was  instructed  that  there  was  to  be  a  new 


124 


TREASON  TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


election  of  officers  for  the  ensuing  year,  and 
we  elected  officers,  probably,  a  week  from 
that  time,  when  Garrett  W.  Logan  was 
elected  Grand  Seignior  in  my  place. 

Q.  Had  you  attended  any  meeting  pre 
vious  to  the  16th  and  17th  of  February? 

A.  That  was  the  first  and  only  one  of  the 
Grand  Council.  , 

Q.  How  did  you  come  to  that  meeting? 

A.  As  delegate  from  the  county  tem 
ple. 

Q.  Who  presided  ? 

A.  II.  II.  Dodd. 

Q.  Who  was  Secretary? 

A.  Mr.  Harrison,  who  was  a  witness  here. 

Q.  Did  you  meet  any  of  the  accused  at 
that  meeting? 

A.  I  met  Dr.  Bowles  there,  and  Mr.  Mil- 
ligan.  I  think,  the  second  day;  I  did  not 
see  Mr.  Humphreys;  never  met  that  gen 
tleman  any-where  as  a  member  of  the  Or 
der  of  American  Knights ;  1  never  met  him 
except  as  a  Freemason.  I  never  saw  Mr. 
Horsey  till  I  came  into  Court,  and  he  was 
required  to  plead  the  same  time  as  I  was. 

Q.  At  that  meeting  on  the  16th  and  17th 
of  February,  you  say  you  met  Dr.  Bowles 
and  Mr.  Milligan  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  Mr.  Milligan  on  the  second 
day,  I  believe. 

Q,  Give  to  the  Court  the  business  trans 
acted,  and  what  you  learned  was  transacted 
at  those  meetings  on  the  16th  and  17th  of 
February. 

A.  The  Grand  Master  read  an  address ; 
certain  committees  were  appointed — one,  I 
think,  upon  a  newspaper  to  disseminate  the 
views  of  the  organization,  and  educate  the 
Democratic  mind  up  to  what  was  thought 
it  ought  to  be;  a  Committee  upon  Litera 
ture  was  appointed  ;  and  a  committee  to  see 
whether  a  person  by  the  name  of  Michael 
Malott  had  been  divulging  the  secrets  of 
the  organization. 

Q.  Who  constituted  those  committees  ? 

A.  I  could  not  tell. 

Q.  Were  you  on  any  committee  ? 

A.  I  was,  sir. 

Q.  On  what? 

A.  To  ferret  out  whether  Mr.  Malott  had 
been  revealing  the  secrets  of  the  order. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  in  pursuance  of  that? 

A.  We  called  the  committee  together; 
brought  Malott  before  us,  and  a  person 
whose  name  I  do  not  remember.  We  in 
vestigated  all  we  could.  Mr.  McBride,  of 
Evansville,  was*>ne  of  the  committee;  the 
others  I  do  not  remember.  It  was  mere 
rumor  and  hearsay;  and  I  told  the  commit- 
tee  that  I  professed  to  know  something  in 
regard  to  law,  and  1  did  not  think  that  the 
evidence  was  such  that  we  could  report  to 
the  Grand  Council  that  the  man  was  guilty, 
and  I  recommended  that  we  report  that 
the  man  was  not  guilty  of  revealing  the 
secrets. 

Q.    What    was    the  penalty  in  case  he 


did  reveal  them?    WThat  did  the  rules  of 
the  order  enjoin  as  to  the  obligation  ? 

A.  I  took  some  obligations,  but  do  not 
know  what  they  were? 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  what  the  penalties 
are  for  revealing  the  secrets  of  the  order? 

A.  I  understand  the  penalty  from  what 
I  have  read,  and  what  I  knew  at  the  time 
and  have  learned  since,  to  be  death,  figura 
tively  speaking. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  that  ? 

A.  The  same  as  in  other  organizations. 

Q.  Was  it  a  figure  of  speech,  or  was  it  to 
be  carried  out  as  fact  ? 

A.  That  I  can  not  answer. 

Q.  Did  you  hear  any  consultation  at  that 
meeting,  in  reference  to  a  man  by  the 
name  of  Coffin  ? 

A.  1  do  not  think  that  I  did ;  I  do  not 
recollect  any  person  mentioning  his  name. 

Q.  Were  you  at  the  meeting  of  the  14th 
of  June  ? 

A.  I  was  not. 

Q.  Were  not  the  Military  Committee 
appointed  on  the  16th  and  17th  of  Febru 
ary? 

A.  No,  sir;  they  were  not  appointed  in 
Council  as  I  understood. 

Q.  Were  any  military  appointments  or 
elections  made  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  were  they  ? 

A.  Grand  Commander,  Deputy  Grand 
Commander,  and  Major  Generals  for  the 
four  divisions  of  the  State  of  Indiana,  a 
Secretary,  and  I  think  Treasurer.  Mr 
Dodd  was  elected  Grand  Commander;  I 
was  elected  Deputy  Grand  Commander; 
Mr.  Milligan  was  elected  Major  General  of 
his  district. 

Q.  Was  Mr.  Milligan  present  at  his  elec 
tion? 

A.  I  can  not  say  that  he  was  present  till 
the  second  day,  and  the  election  of  Major 
Generals  took  place  on  the  first  day  I  be 
lieve.  Mr.  Humphreys  was  elected  in  his 
district.  He  was  not  present  either  day. 
Major  McGrane,  of  Harrison  county,  was 
elected  in  my  district  as  Major  General,  and 
Colonel  JohnC.  Walker  was  elected  for  the 
North-west  district.  The  State  was  divided 
into  four  divisions.  I  do  not  know  exactly 
how  the  lines  run:  but  it  was  divided  by 
counties.  Dr.  Bowles  lived  in  Orange  coun 
ty,  and  the  line  ran  between  Washington 
md  Orange  counties.  Major  McGrane  lived 
mmediately  south  of  Washington.  He 
and  I  roomed  together,  and  we  had  a  great 
deal  of  talk,  and  he  told  me  he  would  have 
nothing  to  do  with  it.  The  next  morning 
Orange  county  was  added  to  the  south 
eastern  division,  in  which  Dr.  Bowles  was. 
Major  McGrane  declined,  and  Dr.  Bowles 
was  unanimously  elected  in  the  place  of 
McGrane. 

Q.  What  other  business  of  importance 
took  place  at  either  of  these  meetings  ? 


TREASON   TRIALS  AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


125 


A.  The  next  thing  I  recollect  was  reports 
from  some  committees  about  literature, 
and  I  think  a  university;  but  I  did  not 
pay  any  attention  to  it.  My  impression 
is  that  we  laid  the  matter  on  f the  table. 
I  •'••is  on  the  committee  with  respect  to  the 
m  .v. -paper;  and  I  think  Mr.  Bingham  was 
on  that  committee  with  me;  and  we  de 
cided  that  it  was  all  a  humbug,  and  we  would 
have  nothing  to  do  with  it,  but  recom 
mended  an  indefinite  postponement  .with 
regard  to  the  newspaper.  Matters  in  regard 
to  the  progress  of  the  order  were  also  talked 
of,  and  reports  were  called  for. 

Q.  What  was  said  to  be  the  strength  of 
the  order  at  that  time  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  what  the  strength  of 
the  order  was. 

Q.  Was  any  thing  said  about  the  aggre 
gate  number  of  the  order  at  that  time? 

A.  I  think  the  Secretary  reported  that 
he  had  not  received  returns  from  several 
counties,  so  that  the  correct  number  could 
not  be  ascertained. 

Q.  Of  what  political  faith  were  the  ma 
jority  of  the  men  comprising  that  organi 
zation? 

A.  They  were  all  Democrats. 

Q.  State  whether  any  other  class  of  men 
were  admitted,  or  was  it  a  sine  qua  non  that 
a  man  must  be  a  Democrat? 

A,  I  do  not  think  any  one  would  have 
got  in  unless  he  professed  to  1^e  a  Demo 
crat. 

Q.  State  to  the  Court  what  were  the  gen 
eral  purposes  and  objects  of  that  order, 
so  far  as  you  learned. 

A.  In  the  first  place,  I  understood  there 
were  two  organizations,  one  within  the 
other ;  the  civil  organization,  to  which  the 
mass  of  the  members  belong,  and  which,  as 
far  as  I  ever  knew,  was  purely  political,  to 
bring  out  the  Democratic  vote  to  the  polls, 
and  to  insure  the  success  of  the  principles 
of  the  Democratic  party,  by  every  means 
in  our  power  to  get  every  voter  out  to  cast 
his  vote;  and  as  we  had  been  told  by  those 
who  instructed  us,  that  it  was  the  deliber 
ate  design  and  arrangement  of  the  Aboli 
tion  party  to  prevent  voting,  we  determined 
to  have  a  free  fight  or  a  fair  election.  I 
have  been  told  by  members  of  the  order 
that  the  other  portion  of  the  organization 
had  for  its  object  the  separating  of  the 
States  of  Ohio,  Indiana,  Illinois,  Missouri, 
and  Kentucky,  from  the  Eastern  States,  to 
make  a  North-western  Confederacy;  and 
failing  in  that,  join  our  fortunes  with  the 
South.  That  was  the  military  part  of  it, 
which  was  not  communicated  or  known  to 
the  members  of  the  civil  organization; 
and  I  presume  I  never  would  have  known 
it,  had  it  not  been  for  the  position  I  held  as 
Deputy  Grand  Commander. 

Q.  What  proportion  of  the  members  be 
longed  to  the  military  portion  of  the  organ 
ization? 


A.  Only  the  leaders;  they  were  to  control 

the  matter  through  a  Committee  of  Thir- 

t»en,  who  were  to   be  known  only  to  the 

Grand  Commander  and  themselves.     They 

i  were  to  so  control  us  as  to   bring   us   into 

their  trap.     That  was  why  I  said  it   was  a 

j  humbug,  and  said  I  would  have  nothing  to 

;  do  with  it. 

Q.  Have  any  of  the  schemes  of  the  order 
come  to  your  knowledge  since  then? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  The  schemes  of  a  few  of  the 
leaders  of  this  military  part  of  the  order, 
and  the  schemes  of  these  were  unknown  to 
the  great  mass  of  the  order. 

Q.  Do  you  say  that  it  was  to  these  mili 
tary  leaders  alone  this  was  confined? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  think  so. 

Q.  Was  Dodd  considered  a  military 
leader? 

A.  He  was;  but  there  was  a  man  over 
him. 

Q.  Who  was  that  ? 

A.  It  was  Dr.  Bowles. 

Q.  Please  to  explain  that  ? 

A.  The  State  was  divided  off  into  Mili 
tary  Departments,  and  there  was  an  officer 
of  the  Military  Department,  who  was  Su 
preme  Commander  to  the  Grand  Com 
mander  of  the  Civil  Department,  who  had 
his  Adjutant,  Staff,  etc.  He  controlled  the 
Military  Department,  and  saw  to  the  arm 
ing,  ammunition,  and  the  procuring  of 
funds. 

Q.  Then  the  civil  was  subservient  to  the 
military  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  and  knew  nothing  except 
the  f^v  who  were  in  the  confidence  of  the 
military. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  who  was  on  the  staff  of 
this  military  leader,  Dr.  Bowles? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  it  is  James  B.  Wilson;  he 
told  m-e  so  himself. 

Q.  What  is  the  position  he  held  ? 

A.  He  told  me  he  was  Adjutant  General 
on  Dr.  Bowies'  Staff.  In  fact,  nearly  all  the 
information  I  ever  received,  except  what  I 
received  on  the  ]6th  and  17th  of  February, 
I  received  from  Mr.  Wilson,  after  his  re 
turn  from  Dr.  Bowies'  at  French  Lick 
Springs,  Orange  county. 

Q.  What  did  you  learn  in  reference  to  the 
arming  of  this  order? 

A.  I  never  understood  that  the  men  of 
the  rank  and  file  of  the  civil  organization 
were  to  be  armed,  that  is,  at  the  expense 
of  the  order. 

Q.  How  were  they  to  arm  ? 

A.  They  were  to  do  it  among  them 
selves? 

Q.  Who  was  it  that  was  to  be  armed  by 
the  order  ? 

A.  These  men  who  were  to  be  under  the 
control  of  the  Commanding  General,  that 
s  the  Military  Commander. 

Q.  How  did  they  make  the  division  as  to 
who  were  to  be  armed  by  the  order,  and 
who  were  to  arm  themselves? 


126 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


A.  There  were  certain  men  they  selected 
to  whom  to  communicate  that  which  it 
would  not  do  to  communicate  to  every 
body. 

Q.  Did  they  go  into  a  township,  for  in 
stance,  and  pick  out  the  men  that  were  to 
be  armed  by  the  order  ? 

A.  I  think  not,  sir. 

Q.  Then  how  could  they  tell  whom  they 
were  to  arm,  and  whom  they  could  rely 
upon  to  arm  themselves? 

A.  I  do  not  know.  They  had  a  way  of 
ascertaining  the  number  of  arms  of  differ 
ent  kinds  that  the  members  of  the  order 
had;  they  would  take  a  sheet  of  paper  and 
rule  it  in  columns,  as  for  keeping  a  tally, 
heading  each  column  with  apples,  corn, 
beans,  or  any  thing  you  please,  so  that  you 
could  understand  what  these  things  were 
intended  for.  Apples  might  stand  for  rifles; 
corn  for  shot-guns;  beans  for  pistols,  and 
potatoes  for  ammunition,  and  any  thing  else 
for  lead.  This  sheet  would  be  a  report  of  the 
number  of  arms  found  by  those  making 
the  return. 

Q.  Was  there  any  agreement  between 
the  members  of  the  order,  as  to  how  it 
should  be  understood  by  those  to  whom 
the  report  was  made? 

A.  My  instructions  were  to  report  by  the 
secret  cypher  how  many  there  were.  Each 
township  temple  reported  to  the  Secretary 
of  the  mother  temple  how  many  arms  and 
how  much  ammunition  they  had,  and  then 
that  Secretary  reported  to  the  Grand  Secre 
tary  of  the  State  Council. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  attempts  ato  the 
part  of  the  members  of  this  order  to  arm 
the  order? 

A.  I  only  know  that  from  hearsay,  from 
members  of  the  order.  I  only  know  what 
Mr.  Wilson  told  me. 

Q.  Was  Mr.  Wilson  a  member  of  the  or 
der? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  he  was  initiated  when  I  was. 

Q.  What  did  he  state  to  you? 

A.  He  had  been  to  French  Lick  Springs, 
to  Dr.  Bowles.  When  he  came  back  from 
there,  myself,  and  I  think  Townsend  Cut- 
shaw,  a  man  by  the  name  of  Purlee,  and  my 
impression  is  that  Mr.  C.  McCoskey  also, 
were  sitting  or  standing  at  the  Clerk's 
office  door.  The  people  in  that  country 
were  at  fever  heat,  anxious  and  unquiet, 
with  rumors  of  this,  that  and  the  other; 
and  the  matter  came  up  in  that  conversa 
tion,  in  regard  to  resisting  the  draft,  when 
Mr.  Wilson  pulled  a  roll  out  of  his  pocket, 
wrapped  up  like  a  banker's  parcel,  and  said 
there  was  one  thousand  dollars  he  had  just 
got  from  Dr.  Bowles,  to  procure  arms  and 
ammunition  for  our  county,  and  there  was 
plenty  more  where  that  came  from. 

Q.  Did  he  state  any  thing  else? 

A.  Not  at  that  time,  but  he  did  after 
ward. 

Q.  What  was  that? 


A.  That  there  was  a  half  a  million  of 
dollars  sent  to  Indiana,  Illinois  and  Ken 
tucky,  I  think,  by  rebel  agents  in  Canada, 
for  the  purpose  of  procuring  arms  and  am 
munition  for  these  North-western  States,  to 
arm  themselves  with. 

Q,  Who  received  this  money  in  this  State? 

A.  Mr.  Dodd,  I  was  told,  and  Mr.  John  C. 
Walker. 

Q.  By  whom  were  you  told  ? 

A.  By  Dr.  Wilson.  I  never  got  a  word 
from  Mr.  Bowles,  Mr.  Humphreys,  Mr.  Milli- 
gan  or  Mr.  Horsey,  in  my  life  as  to  the 
money. 

Q.  What  amount  did  they  receive  ? 

A.  A  hundred  thousand  dollars  each. 

Q.  How  was  it  to  be  expended  ? 

A.  A  portion  of  it  was  to  go  to  Dr.  Bowles, 
to  be  spent  in  his  part  of  the  State  in  pur 
chasing  arms  and  ammunition. 

Q.  For  whom? 

A.  For  the  military  order  that  had  its 
onnection   with    the   Order   of  American 
Knights. 

Q.  When  did  you  have  this  conversation 
with  Dr.  Wilson  ? 

A.  It  could  not  have  been  far  from  the 
middle  of  June,  1864.  I  think  so  from  the 
"act  that  I  was  told  a  Grand  Council  was 
:o  be  held  here  about  that  time,  and  it 
was  shortly  after  that,  that  he  and  I  had 
:his  conversation.  It  must  have  been  in 
June. 

Q.  Did  he  get  that  information  at  that 
meeting? 

A.  I  am  not  certain  that  he  came  to  In 
dianapolis,  but  it  was  shortly  after  that 
meeting  that  he  told  me.  Whether  he 
»vent  to  the  meeting,  or  got  it  from  Dr. 
Bowles,  I  can  not  say. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  from  him,  or  other  mem- 
jers  of  the  order,  for  what  purpose  those 
arms  were  to  be  used  after  they  were  pur 
chased  and  distributed  to  the  members  of 
the  Order  of  American  Knights? 

A.  I  never  heard  how  they  were  to  be 
distributed,  neither  do  I  know  to  whom 
they  were  to  be  distributed ;  but  I  supposed, 
is  a  matter  of  course,  they  were  to  be  dis- 
ributed  to  members  of  the  order,  and  were 
to  be  used  either  to  defend  themselves  from 
oppression  and  wrong,  or  to  fight  any  thing 
that  came  to  fight  them. 

Q.  Werev  or  were  not  these  arms  to  be 
used  in  carrying  out  the  purposes  of  the 
order  that  you  have  detailed  ? 

A.  I  understood  they  were  to  be  used  for 
the  purpose  of  carrying  out  the  military 
part  of  the  organization  of  the  American 
Knights. 

Q.  Do  you  know  when  the  order  was 
changed  ? 

A.  I  presume  it  was  changed  before  June. 

Q.  Before  you  had  this  conversation  with 
Dr.  Wilson  ? 

A.  I  think  it  was. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  to  say  that  the 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


127 


object  of  the  military  part  of  this  order  was 
to  establish  a  North-western  Confederacy  in 
conjunction  with  the  Southern  Confederacy? 

A.  I  understood  the  object  to  be  to  sepa 
rate  themselves  from  the  Eastern  States,  and 
form  a  Confederacy  of  themselves ;  or  else, 
failing  to  do  that,  join  their  fortunes  to  the 
Southern  Confederacy. 

Q.  Then  were,  or  were  not  those  arms  to 
be  used  in  carrying  out  these  objects  of  the 
military  organization  ? 

A.  That  was  my  understanding. 

Q  Did  you  ever  see  more  than  this  one 
thousand  dollars  that  you  saw  with  Mr. 
Wilson  ? 

A.  I  never  did. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  of  any  arms  being  bought 
by  him  ?  • 

A.  He  and  I  had  very  little  talk  for  three 
months  past;  but  I  never  heard  of  his  offer 
ing  to  buy  an  arm  or  ammunition.  I  never 
learned  from  any  body  that  he  did.  I  was 
asked  what  he  did  with  the  money,  but  I 
did  not  know. 

Q.  Were  these  military  objects  of  the  or 
der  discussed  either  individually  or  publicly, 
at  the  meetings  of  the  16th  and  17th  of 
February  ? 

A.  The  matter  was  talked  of  by  some  of 
us,  perhaps  a  few  of  us  in  a  corner,  or  off  to 
one  side. 

Q.  Did  you  at  that  time  ever  talk  with 
Mr.  Milligan  or  Mr.  Bowles  upon  that  sub 
ject? 

A.  Mr.  Bowles  was  probably  there  one 
morning  when  we  were  talking  about  it.  I 
remember  there  was  something  about  his 
papers,  about  his  being  a  major  general, 
that  did  not  suit  him;  and  I  know  we  had 
talks  among  ourselves,  probably  five  or  six 
of  us  at  a  time. 

Q.  Did  there  ever  come  to  your  knowl 
edge,  at  any  time,  any  intention  on  the  part 
of  this  order  to  take  possession  of  the  State 
Government? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Detail  to  the  Court  what  you  learned 
in  reference  to  that. 

A.  This  I  also  received  from  the  same 
source — Dr.  Wilson.  He  told  me  that  upon 
a  certain  day,  the  10th,  but  whether  of 
August  or  July  I  am  not  certain,  of  this 
year,  there  was  to  have  been  an  uprising ; 
the  prisoners  were  to  be  released  at  the 
camp  near  Chicago — I  think  Camp  Douglas — 
at  Camp  Morton,  and  a  camp  near  Colum 
bus,  Ohio,  Camp  Chase  it  is  called,  I  believe. 
The  arsenals  of  the  United  States  were  to  be 
seized,  and  the  prisoners  armed  with  the 
arms  and  equipments  contained  therein. 

Q.  What  then  was  to  be  done  ? 

A.  Governor  Morton  was  to  be  taken  care 
of. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  being  taken 
care  of? 

A.  He  was  to  be  held  as  a  hostage  for 
those  who  might  be  taken  prisoners,  and 


engaged  in  the  uprising.  Dr.  Athon  was  to 
be  Governor,  under  the  law  of  the  State  of 
Indiana,  passed  a  few  sessions  since;  in  case 
of  the  Governor  failing  to  serve,  he  would 
be  Governor;  we  should  call  out  the  militia, 
and  have  every  thing  our  own  way. 

Q.  In  case  you  failed  to  capture  Governor 
Morton,  what  then  ? 

A.  In  case  he  was  not  captured  and  made 
hostage,  he  was  to  be  made  away  with  in 
some  way,  but  I  never  was  told  how. 

Q.  After  the  arsenals  were  seized,  the 
rebel  prisoners  armed,  and  the  members  of 
the  order  armed,  what  then  was  to  be  done 
by  the  members  of  the  order  ? 

A.  I  did  not  understand  that  all  the  mem 
bers  of  the  order  were  to  take  part ;  it  was 
the  military  part,  and  as  many  as  could  be 
induced  by  excitement  or  any  means,  or  be 
drawn  into  it  through  the  influence  of  the 
military  leaders.  Then  the  State  Govern 
ment  was  to  go  ahead,  with  the  law  and 
Constitution  as  we  had  it,  except  that  Dr. 
Athon  was  to  replace  Governor  Morton. 

Q.  Was  this  scheme  known  or  imparted 
to  any  but  members  of  the  order  ? 

A.  Not  that  I  ever  knew  of. 

Q.  State  whether  or  not  leading  Demo 
crats  of  the  State  were  given  this  scheme  ? 

A.  It  was  given  only  to  members  of  the 
order;  I  never  knew  of  its  being  commu 
nicated  to  any  Democrat  unless  he  was  a 
member  of  the  order,  and  I  think  it  was 
not. 

Q.  Did  a  man  by  the  name  of  John 
man,  of  Washington  county,  belong 
order?  A 

A.  I  "ever  met  him,  but  I  understood  he 
was  a  member.  There  were  very  few  Demo 
crats  in  our  county  (Washington)  but  what 
were  members.  I  think  Mr.  Bowman  knew 
nothing  about  the  military  part;  at  least 
not  to  my  knowledge. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  what  was  done  at  the 
meeting  in  New  York  on  the  22d  of  Feb 
ruary  ? 

A.  Nothing  except  that  the  ritual  was 
changed.  I  am  not  certain  whether  that 
was  in  New  York  or  Chicago. 

Q.  Do  you  know  who  this  Council  of  Six 
teen  were? 

A.  I  do  not  know  of  such  .a  Council; 
never  heard  of  it  till  I  was  arrested.  1  have 
some  indirect  knowledge  of  a  Council  of 
Thirteen. 

Q.  Was  Dr.  Wilson  at  that  meeting  in 
Chicago  ? 

A.  1  can  not  state. 

Q.  Did  he  tell  you  whether  he  was  or 
not? 

A.  I  am  not  positive;  I  do  not  think  he 
did. 

Q.  You  say  you  did  have  some  indirect 
knowledge  of  the  Committee,  of  Thirteen? 
What  was  it? 

A.  I  understood  there  was  such  a  Com 
mittee  ;  that  it  was  appointed  by  the  Grand 


A  v      rr  ti- 

ti  Bow-       I 
to  this       / 


128 


TREASON   TRIALS  AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


Commander,  and  known  only  to  him  anc 
the  members  themselves. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  the  appointment 
of  a  Committee  of  Ten  ? 

A.  The  Committee  of  Ten  that  I  think 
you  refer  to  was  not  a  Committee.  They 
were  individuals  selected,  as  my  under 
standing  was,  to  take  care  of  Governor 
Morton. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  who  they  were  ? 

A.  I  did- not. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  taking  care  of 
Governor  Morton? 

A.  To  hold  him  as  a  hostage,  or  in  case 
he  could  not  be  held,  whether  he  was  to  be 
killed  or  not,  I  did  not  hear;  but  he  was  to 
be  put  out  of  the  way  by  some  means. 

Q.  They  were  to  dispose  of  him  and  get 
him  out  of  the  way;  hdw  ? 

A.  I  can  not  say ;  but  they  were  to  get  rid 
of  him  in  some  way  if  he  was  not  held  as  a 
hostage  ? 

Cyrus  L.  Dunham,  one  of  the  counsel  for 
the  accused,  here  said:  • 

There  are  peculiar  circumstances  attend 
ing  what  has  taken  place  this  afternoon, 
and  I  regard  it  as  my  duty  to  make  a  state 
ment  which  I  ask  to  be  put  upon  the  rec 
ords  of  this  Court.  My  relations  to  all 
parties  here  are  well  known  to  this  Com 
mission.  I  have  not  only  been  counsel  for 
Mr.  Heffren,  but  as  the  records  show,  I  am 
counsel  for  other  defendants.  It  places  me 
in  rather  a  queer  position  before  them,  and 
perhaps  before  this  Court;  and  I  desire  to 
make  this  statement,  which  I  have  put  in 
writing,  and  which  I  ask  to  have  nut  upon 
the  records : 

INDIANAPOLIS,  November  4,  1864. 
May  it  please  the  Court : 

Being  counsel  for  Mr.  Heffren,  and  also 
for  other  defendants  on  this  trial,  I  deem  it 
due  to  those  other  defendants,  and  to  my 
own  professional  and  personal  honor,  most 
solemnly  to  state  to  this  Commission,  and 
in  the  presence  of  those  other  defendants, 
that  I  had  no  knowledge  or  intimation  that 
the  prosecution  against  said  Heffren  was  to 
be  abandoned,  and  that  he  was-  to  be  put 
on  the  stand  as  a  witness,  until,  in  open 
Court,  he  was  called  to  the  stand  by  the 
Judge  Advocate;  that  I  was  in  no  wise,  or 
by  any  person,  consulted  in  regard  to  it; 
that  I  never,  directly  or  indirectly,  sought, 
or  even  entertained  the  idea  of  the  bring 
ing  about  of  such  a  result. 

[Signed]  CYRUS  L.  DUNHAM. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Thursday,  November  10,  at  2  o'clock, 
P.  M. 

COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         ) 
November  10,  1804,  2  o'clock,  P.  M.  J 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  ad 
journment. 

All  the  members  present,  except  Colonel 
Reuben  Williams  and  Colonel  Benjamin 


Spooner.     Also,   the  Judge  Advocate,   the 
accused,  and  their  counsel. 

The  proceedings  of  Friday.  November  4, 
were  read  and  approved. 

Reuben  Dailey  was  then  sworn  by  the 
Judge  Advocate,  as  Assistant  Recorder,  in 
presence  of  the  accused. 

The  examination  of  Horace  Heffren,  a 
witness  for  the  Government,  was  then  pro 
ceeded  with  as  follows : 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate : 

Did  you  not  state  that  Dr.  James  B.  Wil 
son  was  Adjutant  General  on  Dr.  Bowies' 
staff? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  other  staff  of 
ficer? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  Garrett  W.  Logan  was  Quar 
termaster. 

Q.  Where  did  he  reside? 

A.  In  Salem,  Monroe  township,  Washing 
ton  county,  Indiana. 

Q.  How  do  you  know  that? 

A.  David  D.  Hamilton  and  Garrett  W. 
Logan  went  to  see  Colonel  Bowles  some 
time  during  the  past  summer  or  spring. 
Hamilton  was  a  member  of  the  organiza 
tion,  so  was  Logan,  who  is  now  the  Grand 
Seignior  of  Washington  county;  he  was 
elected  sometime  in  February.  Mr.  Ham- 
Iton  told  me  what  Logan  was  going  for;  but 
[  had  no  confidence  in  him,  and  I  wrote,  a 
.etter  to  Dr.  Bowles  telling  him  not  to  trust 
lim,  that  he  would  betray  him.  When 
Hamilton  came  back  he  said  that  Dr.  Bowles 
lad  offered  him  a  Brigadier  Generalship, 
and  he  would  not  accept  of  it,  and  Bowles 
said  their  business  was  at  an  end,  and  Lo- 
an  was  appointed  Quartermaster;  Logan 
;old  me  so  himself;  and  the  reason  was, 
;hat  he  had  a  sore  leg,  and  would  have  the 
advantage  of  riding  on  horseback  instead 
of  going  afoot.  To  my  positive  knowledge 
has  had  a  sore  leg  for  seven  or  eight 
years. 

Q.  Were  there  any  other  staff  officers 
except  Dr.  Wilson  and  Mr.  Logan  ? 

A.  Not  that  I  know  of. 

Q.  State  whether  you  have  any  knowl 
edge  of  a-  regiment  of  lancers  being  organ- 
zed,  or  of  any  provision  being  made  to  fur 
nish  the  members  of  the  order  with  lances. 

A.  I  have  not  of  a  regiment,  but  of  com 
panies  composing  a  regiment.     The  first  I 
inew  of  it  was  from  Dr.  Wilson  telling  me 
hat  Bowles  had  made  an  arrangement  to 
lave   nine  companies  of  infantry,    one   of 
ancers,  and  one  section  of  artillery,  to  com- 
>rise    each    regiment   in   this   order.     The 
ancers  were  to  be  armed  with  lances,  of 
what  length  I  do  not  know,  but  there  was 
;o  be  a  hook,  somewhat  after  the  fashion  of 
sickle;    the  lance  to  punch  with,  and  a 
sickle  to  cut  the  horse's  bridle;  there  was 
,o  be  a  thrust  and  a  cut,  a  thrust  for  the 
man  and  a  cut  for  the  horses'  bridles;  he 
hought  the  enemy  would  become  confused 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


129 


and  distracted,  and  if  a  charge  was  made 
upon  them  when  they  had  no  means  of 
controlling  the  horses,  they  would  be  easily 
mashed  up. 

Q.  Were  any  steps  taken  toward  procur 
ing  those  lances? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  ever  a  lance  was 
made,  or  contracted  to  be  made;  I  only 
know  that  Dr.  Wilson  told  me  that  arrange 
ments  were  on  foot  to  get  them,  but  he  did 
'not  say  where,  or  by  whom,  or  when  they 
were  to  be  furnished.  He  said  they  would 
be  a  terrible  weapon  in  a  fight.  I  thought 
he  did  not  know  as  much  about  it  as  I  did, 
or  lie  would  not  try  it. 

Q.  Give  to  the  Court  the  secret  cypher 
used  by  the  order,  as  far  as  you  have  knowl 
edge  of  it. 

A.  If  I  wanted  to  write  to  the  Judge  Ad 
vocate,  he  and  I  would  understand  what 
book  we  would  have  to  write  from ;  it 
might  be  Dellart's  Military  Law,  the  Bible, 
or  a  hymn  book,  it  would  not  matter  what, 
so  that  we  understood  what  book  was  re 
ferred  to.  I  would  make  my  date,  and 
place  under  it  in  parenthesis  the  figures 
denoting  the  page,  and  the  figure  at  the  left 
end  of  the  line  would  designate  the  line  on 
which  I  commenced;  for  instance,  if  it  was 
the  figure  fifteen,  it  would  indicate  the  fif 
teenth  line  from  the  top.  The  page  of  the 
book  would  be  placed  on  the  right  hand 
.side,  in  parenthesis;  and  the  number  of  the 
line  on  the  left.  When  I  could  not  find 
the  letter  I  wanted  on  any  line  in  that 
page,  then  I  left  a  line  in  blank  and  put 
another  number,  which  was  to  designate 
the  page  to  which  I  wanted  to  refer  in  pa 
renthesis  in  that  blank  line,  and  then  pro 
ceeded  as  before.  If  I  wished  to  write,  "I 
do  not  want  them,"  I  would  count  the  let 
ters  in  the  designated  line,  counting  from 
the  left,  and  put  down  for  ''I  "  the  number 
three  ("3"),  if  that  is  the  third  letter,  and 
"13  "  for  "  d,"  if  that  is  the  thirteenth  letter 
in  line,  etc. 

Q.  You  were  appointed  as  delegate  to 
Chicago,  were  you  not? 

A.  I  was  told  by  Mr.  Dodd,  that,  by  vir 
tue  of  my  office  as  Deputy  Grand  Com 
mander,  I  was  a  delegate  to  Chicago;  but 
I  did  not  go.  William  P.  Green,  of  Salem, 
Indiana,  was  started  in  my  place.  This 
must  have  been  about  the  17th  or  18th  of 
June,  1864;  it  might  have  been  a  few  days 
before  or  after. 

Q.  Then  it  was  not  the  July  meeting  he 
attended,  was  it? 

A.  I  can  not  state  positively. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  from  him  whether  he 
had  been  there  ? 

A.  He  went  there;  he  had  my  proxy; 
and  I  saw  him  after  his  return. 

Q.  Did  he  state  to  you  what  was  done? 

A.  He  told  me,  and  others  in  my  pres 
ence,  that  he  had  been  there,  and  made  a 
report  of  what   was  done;  but  I  was  afraid 
9 


that  he  was  not  telling  the  truth,  and  so 
were  some  others,  Mr.  Cutshaw,  Dr.  Wilson, 
Mr.  McCoskey,  and  also  Mr.  Bowser.  1 
sent  my  brother  to  Mr.  Dodd,  at  Indianapo 
lis,  to  see  whether  what  he  stated  was  true, 
and  we  found  that  he  had  fallen  in  the 
hands  of  the  detectives,  that  they  had  got  my 
proxy,  and  that  he  did  not  get  into  the  Grand 
Council  at  all;  he  made  a  bad  failure  of  it. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  the  names  of  the  men 
comprising  this  Committee  of  Ten,  who  were 
to  take  care  of  Governor  Morton  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  never  did;  they  were  to  be 
selected  by  the  Committee  of  Thirteen, 
and  were  only  known  to  the  Grand  Coun 
cil,  and  to  the  members  of^this  Committee 
of  Thirteen.  Mr.  Harris  told  me  he  knew 
more  about  the  order  than  I  did. 

Q.  Did  I  understand  you  to  say  the  Com 
mittee  of  Thirteen  selected  the  Committee 
of  Ten  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  they  were  to  hold  Governor 
Morton  as  a  hostage  for  those  that  were 
taken  prisoners,  or  to  make  away  with  him 
some  way,  but  they  never  told  me  how. 

Q.  State  whether  or  not  there  was  any 
arrangement,  or  instructions  given,  by 
which  the  property  of  members  of  this  or 
der  was  to  be  saved  in  case  of  invasion  by 
the  rebels? 

A.  There  was,  sir;  there  was  a  flag  that 
was  lo  be  the  emblem;  it  was  to  be  a  white 
flag  placed  upon  a  flag  staff,  with  a  red 
ribbon  running  along  the  flag  where  it  was 
tacked  on  to  the  staff',  down  each  side  of  the 
staff,  and  three  or  four  inches  below,  making 
red,  white,  and  red  ;  the  flag  was  to  be  hung 
out  at  the  house  or  stable,  or  any-where  else, 
and  that  property  would  be  saved  or  pro 
tected. 

Q.  When  was  this  to  be  used? 

A.  Whenever  there  was  a  rebel  invasion 
or  raid. 

Q.  Was  this  knowledge  imparted  to  any 
but  members  of  the  order  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  told  it  to  no  one  except  to 
my  father. 

Q.  When  did  you  expect  this  raid  ? 

A.  About  the  16th  of  August.  Dr.  Bowles 
had  sent  a  man  to  see  General  Price,  but 
he  had  not  returned. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  Mr.  Michael  C. 
Kerr  is  a  member  of  this  order  or  not? 

A.  He  was;  I  initiated  him  in  New  Albany, 
Indiana,  at  a  harness  shop  on  the  right 
hand  side  of  Main  street,  as  you  go  east,  I 
believe  at  Mr.  Graff's. 

Q.  How  many  degrees  did  he  take? 

A.  I  was  only  there   two   nights,  but   I 
took  him  through;   I   recollect  that  I  gave, 
him  all  three  the  same  night. 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  cause  of  the  failure 
of  the  insurrection  contemplated  here  on 
the  16th  of  August  last?  If  so,  give  it  to 
the  Court. 

A.  I  know  one  reason  of  it,  I  presume; 
Mr.  Kerr,  I  am  told  by  members  of  the 


130 


TREASON  TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


order,  received  word  what  was  to  be  done, 
and  he  came  to  Indianapolis  and  reported 
to  the  authorities  here,  Mr.  Athon,  Mr. 
Ristine,  McDonald  and  others,  and  did 
what  he  could  to  prevent  it. 

Q.  Do  you  know  any  other  reason? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  because,  the  army  of  the 
Confederacy  did  not  come  up  through  Cum 
berland  Gap  as  they  had  agreed  to  do,  or  as 
it  was  reported  they  had  agreed  to  do. 

Q.  Was  there,  or  was  there  not,  any  com 
munication  with  General  Price,  in  Missouri? 

A.  There  was,  sir. 

Q.  Who  told  you  they  had  communica 
tion  with  General  Price? 

A.  Dr.  Wilson  said  Dr.  Bowies'  man  had 
gone  to  see  Price,  and  another  had  gone  to 
Richmond  to  arrange  for  troops  to  come 
through  Cumberland  Gap,  and  when  they 
returned,  they  thought  it  would  be  before 
the  16th  of  August  1864,  about  which  time 
the  rumpus  would  take  place. 

Q.  Did  they  fail  to  communicate  with  the 
Confederate  forces,  and  if  so,  did  that  have 
any  thing  to  do  with  the  failure  of  the  in 
surrection? 

A.  I  understood  these  men  failed  to  get 
back  in  time. 

Q.  Did  that  have  any  thing  to  do  with 
the  failure? 

A.  I  do  not  know;  I  was  not  in  their  se 
crets  at  that  time. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  from  any  members  of 
the  order  whether  they  had  any  communi 
cation? 

A.  I  believe  I  did,  sir:  from  Mr.  Harris. 

Q.  What  did  he  say?  ' 

A.  He  said  that  the  Richmond  man  got 
on  his  way,  but  we  never  heard  from  the 
messenger. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  the  Richmond 
man  ? 

A.  The  man  that  went  to  communicate 
with  the  rebels  at  Richmond. 

Q.  Did  you  hear  any  thing  with  respect 
to  the  man  that  went  to  communicate  with 
Price? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  never  learned  his  name,  and 
do  not  know  whether  he  communicated 
with  Price  or  not;  there  was  a  man  who 
had  been  communicating  with  rebel  offi 
cials,  but  I  do  not  know  what  or  who  they 
were,  for  about  March  or  April  some  of  the 
members  said  I  would  not  do  to  tie  to. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  tax  being  levied 
upon  the  members  of  the  order?  and  for 
what  purpose? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  it  was  to  be  twenty  cents  per 
month;  one  dollar  for  the  first  degree,  one 
dollar  and  a  half  for  the  second  degree, 
and  two  and  a  half  for  the  third  degree, 
which  was  to  go  into  the  treasury. 

Q.  How  was  that  money  to  be  expended? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that? 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  direct  tax  being 
levied  upon  members  of  the  order,  and  do 
you  know  how  it  was  expended? 


A.  It  was  spent  for  arms  and  ammuni 
tion  for  the  military  part  of  the  order;  I 
presume  that  the  large  mass  of  them  did 
not  know  how  it  was  to  be  expended,  or 
what  they  were  paying  taxes  for;  it  was 
said  to  be  for  establishing  a  university  and 
starting  a  newspaper,  but  the  real  purpose 
was  for  the  purchase  of  arms  and  ammuni 
tion. 

Mr.  Kerr  received  some  information  from 
a  gentleman  at  Salem,  and  set  himself  to 
work  to  find  out  in  regard  to  the  whole 
thing,  and  by  some  means,  I  know  not  how, 
obtained,  1  am  told,  the  information  that 
a  meeting  was  held  here  by  the  Republican 
party,  and  that  the  arrangement  was  made 
to  fix  up  things  to  secure  the  election,  and 
that  I  had  sold  out  Washington  county  to 
the  Republicans,  and  was  to  receive  there 
for  the  sum  of  ten  thousand  dollars;  and 
Mr.  Kerr,  as  I  am  told,  sent  a  runner  with 
a  letter  to  Dr.  Wilson  for  the  committee  to 
come  at  once  to  New  Albany.  Indiana,  The 
committee  consisted  of  James  B.  Wilson, 
John  L.  Menaugh,  and  Dr.  Painter;  they 
went  there,  and  had  their  consultation; 
what  it  was  I  do  not  know,  for  since  re 
turning  home,  I  have  not  staid  at  home  a 
night,  for  I  have  been  threatened  to  be 
hung  since  testifying. 

Q.  Do  you  know  by  whom  these  threats 
were  made? 

A.  I  do  not  wish  to  state  that  at  present, 
unless  you  desire  it  particularly. 
Q.  For  what  reason  ? 
A.  7or  my  own  safety.     I  have  not  staid 
at  home  a  night  since  I  last  testified  on 
Friday  last. 

Q.  Do  you  know  either  by  report,  or  from 
any  members  of  the  order,  where  any  arms 
or  ammunition  of  this  order  are  stored  ? 

A.  As  a  man  of  a  little  honor  left,  at  least, 
1  do  not  think  that  question  should  be  asked, 
for  I  do  not  think  I  ought  to  state  what 
was  said  to -me  when  I  was  in  prison  with 
other  men. 

Objection  waived  on  the  part  of  all  the 
accused. 

I  know  what  Mr.  Horsey  told  me  and  Mr. 
Humphreys ;  he  told  where  he  hid  his  buck 
shot,  caps  and  powder;  some  of  it  was  hid 
in  a  manger  under  the  horses'  feed,  and  in 
a  barrel  the  caps  were  hid ;  other  portions 
were  hid  in  a  stable  and  upon  the  plates  in 
the  corncrib;  Shirklitfe  carried  off  much  of 
it;  and  the  powder  was  hid  in  barrels  in  hi« 
house. 

Q.  When  did  he  tell  you  this? 
A.  When  I  was  in  prison  with  him;  four 
hundred  pounds  of  lead  are  hid  in  different 
places,  some  of  it  left  with  a  man  by  the 
name  of  Baker,  and  a  man  he  called  Miller 
helped  to  pack  some  of  the  powder  across 
the  river.  Shirkliffe  has  since  been  drafted, 
and  is  now  in  the  army;  he  told  where  the 
money  came  from  that  they  got  it  with; 
from  Dr.  Bowles. 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


131 


Q.  Did  you  learn  what  quantity  of  ammu 
nition  was  hid? 

A.  There  were  four  hundred  pounds  of 
lend  and  several  thousand  musket  caps;  I 
think  some  six  or  seven  kegs  of  powder. 
Both  Mr.  Humphreys  and  myself  wanted 
Mr.  Horsey  taken  from  our  cell ;  we  did  not 
wish  to  be  associated  with  him,  and  we  had 
even  written  a  letter  to  Colonel  Warner, 
which  Mr.  Humphreys  and  myself  signed, 
requesting  a  change. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

Question  by  the  accused: 

When  do  you  say  you  joined  this  order? 

Answer.  I  find  I  was  mistaken  in  my  an 
swer  in  the  examination-in-chief.  It  must 
have  been  in  September  I  joined  the  order; 
because  I  let  a  gentleman  read  the  obliga 
tion  and  ritual  instead  of  swearing  him  to  it. 

Q.  What  is  his  name  ? 

A.  His  name  is  Joseph  V.  Cutshaw.  He 
is  now  Clerk  of  the  Court.  He  was  then  a 
candidate  for  that  office.  I  gave  him  the 
ritual  to  read  with  the  understanding  that 
he  would  take  the  obligation. 

Q.  At  what  time  did  you  attend  the  first 
Grand  Council? 

A.  On  the  16th  and  17th  of  February. 

Q.  Were  you  not  at  the  Council  in  the 
fall? 

A.  I  was  not  at  the  November  session.  I 
was  entitled  to  go  as  delegate,  by  virtue  of 
my  office,  but  I  could  not  attend,  and  got 
Mr.  Wilson  to  go  in  my  place. 

Q.  What  do  you  know  about  the  military 
bill? 

A.  I  do  not  know  any  thing  about  its 
adoption.  That  bill,  I  understood,  was  con 
fided  to  the  Committee  of  Thirteen,  who  had 
exclusive  control  of  it. 

Q.   Who  did  you  learn  this  from? 

A.  I  understood  from  Dr.  Wilson  that 
this  was  the  case. 

Q.  Was  Dr.  Wilson  at  the  November 
meeting? 

A.  I  think  he  was. 

Q.  Did  he  tell  you  this  after  his  return  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  first  hear  of  the  mili 
tary  organization  of  the  order  ? 

A.  I  can  not  state  the  date.  If  I  could  be 
positive  about  Dr.  Wilson's  attendance  at 
the  November  meeting  of  the  Grand  Coun 
cil,  I  could  tell  you  how  long  it  was  before 
or  after  it. 

Q.  At  what  time  did  you  first  learn  of  the 
military  feature  of  the  order? 

A.  It  was  some  time  in  the  latter  part  of 
1863.  or  in  the  first  part  of  1864. 

Q.  From  whom  did  you  learn  it? 

A.  From  Dr.  Wilson,  and  I  believe  also 
from  Mr.  Harris.  It  was  at  the  time  they 
told  me  about  the  arsenals. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  it  prior  to  the  meeting 
in  February  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 


Q.  Did  Dr.  Wilson  tell  you  prior  to  that 
meeting  that  he  was  on  Dr.  Bowies'  staff? 

A.  No,  sir.     He  never  told  me  so  but  once. 

Q.  How  often  did  you  see  Dr.  Bowles? 

A.  I  never  saw  him  except  once  at  his 
own  house,  once  in  attending  Court  at  Paoli, 
and  once  at  a  meeting  of  the  State  Council. 

Q.  When  was  that  meeting  held  ? 

A.  On  the  16th  and  17th  of  February. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  Dr.  Bowles  was 
elected  major  general? 

A.  I  was  present  at  the  election,  and  ar 
ranged  the  counties,  attaching  Orange 
county  to  the  District,  so  that  when  Major 
McGrane  refused  to  serve,  Dr.  Bowles  could 
take  his  place.  Major  McGrane  declined, 
and  Dr.  Bowles  was  elected. 

Q.  Was  not  Dr.  Bowles  the  junior  major 
general  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  How  does  that  come  ? 

A.  The  military  and  civil  organizations 
were  not  regulated  alike  in  regard  to  rank 
of  junior  or  senior. 

Q.  Did  not  the  military  organization  of 
the  order  adopt  the  same  rules  in  regard  to 
grades  and  rank  as  are  in  force  in  the  army 
of  the  United  States,  ranking  according  to 
the  date  of  their  commissions? 

A.  Not  that  I  know  of. 

Q.  As  Dr.  Bowles  was  elected  after  the 
other  major  generals,  because  Major  Mc 
Grane  had  declined,  how  do  you  know  he 
was  not  the  junior  officer? 

A.  Dr.  Wilson  said  he  was  the  ranking 
major  general,  through  his  military  experi 
ence  in  the  Mexican  war,  and  had  control 
of  the  military  part  of  the  organization. 

Q.  Did  not  Major  McGrane  hold  the  same 
position  and  the  same  rank  as  that  to 
which  Dr.  Bowles  was  afterward  elected? 

A.  I  think  not. 

Q.  Why  not  ? 

A.  Because  I  never  knew  that  he  was  in 
the  confidence  of  the  order,  and  had  control 
of  it,  as  I  knew  Dr.  Bowles  was,  from  what 
I  heard  Dr.  Wilson,  Mr.  Hamilton,  and  Mr. 
Logan  say. 

Q.  Did  Dr.  Bowies'  election  differ  from 
any  other  ? 

A.  It  did  not. 

Q.  Are  you  acquainted  with  any  act  which 
led  you  to  the  conclusion  that  Dr.  Bowles 
was  at  the  head  of  the  military  organiza 
tion? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  was  it? 

A.  What  Dodd  stated,  at  the  February 
meeting,  that  Dr.  Bowles  was  boss  of  the 
whole  machine  of  the  military  part  of  the 
order. 

Q.  Who  were  the  other  Major  Gener 
als? 

A.  Major  Conklin  was  one.  Dr.  Yeakle 
was  also  appointed  as  a  Major  General,  and 
Mr.  Humphreys  was  appointed  for  another 
district. 


132 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


Q.  Who  was  intrusted  with  the  armin 
of  the  order? 

A.  I  understood  the  Commander-in-chie 
of  the  military  part  of  the  order,  Dr.  Bowles 
had  charge  of  it. 

Q.  Who  received  the  money  for  that  pur 
pose? 

A.  Colonel  John  C.  Walker  and  Dodd 
each,  received  $1,000,  and  Dr.  Bowles  re 
ceived  his  share. 

Q.  How  much  was  that  ? 
A.  I  do  not  know. 
Q.  From  whom  did  he  receive  it  ? 
A.  I  never  heard.    Probably  from  Walk  e 
and  Dodd. 

Q.  Did  he  have  to  depend  on  his  juniors 
for  funds? 

A.  I  do  not  know  whether  you  would  cal 
them  his  juniors  or  seniors. 

Q.  But  seniors  do  not  have  to  depend  on 
their  juniors  in  the  army,  do  they? 

A.  If  they  did  not,  they  would  never  gei 
into  any  battle. 

Q.  Did  Dr.  Bowles  have  to  rely  entirely 
upon  his  Grand  Commander  for  funds? 

A.  I  can  not  state  whether  he  relied  en 
tirely  on  him  or  not. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  Dr.  Bowles  get 
ting  money  from  other  sources? 
A.  I  did  not. 
Q.    When  did   you  determine    to    have 
nothing  more  to  do  with  this  order? 

A.  On  the  16th  of  February,  after  the 
case  of  Mr.  Malott  had  been  investigated 
I  had  been  on  the  Committee  of  Investiga 
tion  on  the  charge  against  Mr.  Malott,  of 
having  divulged  the  secrets  of  the  order. 
After  the  report  was  made,  Mr.  Moss,  of 
Greene  county,  and  Mr.  Malott,  left  the 
room  with  me  to  take  a  drink.  We  came 
down  to  the  foot  of  the  stairs ;  there  Mr. 
Moss  and  Mr.  Malott  asked  me  what  I 
thought  of  the  investigation;  I  said  I 
thought  it  did  not  amount  to  much,  and 
that  the  whole  concern  was  a  humbug,  and 
not  worth  a  damn.  One  of  them  said,  "  Let's 
go  and  take  a  drink  on  that."  We  came 
down  to  Hezekiah's  and  took  a  drink,  and 
then  agreed  to  have  nothing  more  to  do 
with  the  order. 

Q.  Did  you  inform  the  rest  of  the  order 
of  that  intention? 

A.  I  did  not;  I  did  not  propose  to  make 
a  blowing-horn  of  myself  at  that  time. 
Q.  When  were  you  elected? 
A.    I  was   elected    Deputy    Grand  Com 
mander  on   the    16th   or   17th   of    Febru 
ary. 

Q.  Before  you  resolved  to  quit  it  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  communicate  your  intention 
to  have  nothing  more  to  do  with  it  to  any 
body  else  ? 

A.  I  informed  nobody  but  Mr.  Moss,  Mr. 
Malott,  and  Mr.  Bingham,  with  whom  1  had 
talked  frequently, and  we  thought  we  would 
let  it  alone,  and  let  it  grind  out  itself. 


Q.  At  what  time  did  you  leave  Indianap 
olis  after  coming  to  this  resolution  ? 

A.  That  evening,  or  the  next  day. 

Q.  What  members  of  the  order  do  you 
remember  went  home  with  you? 

A.  Nobody;  I  went  by  myself;  I  was  the 
only  member  from  Washington  county 
here,  that  I  recollect. 

Q.  Did  you  keep  that  resolution  to  have 
nothing  more  to  do  with  it  ? 

A.  I  did,  sir;  except  so  far  as  was  neces 
sary  to  inform  my  particular  friends  of  any 
insurrection  that  might  take  place. 

Q.  Were  you  a  civil  member  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  and  a  military  one,  too. 

Q.  How  far  were  you  military? 

A.  As  far  as  a  Grand  Commander. 

Q.  What  were  your  powers? 

A.  The  same  as  the  Grand  Commander, 
when  he  was  deposed,  or  out  of  the  way. 

Q.  How  was  it  when  you  acted  for  or 
under  him? 

A.  I  never  acted  under  him;  I  had  nothing 
to  do  except  when  he  was  out  of  the  way. 

Q.  Had  he  any  right  to  act  through  you 
as  his  deputy? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Then  you  only  acted  in  the  absence  or 
death  of  the  Grand  Commander? 

A.  Then  I  would  be  Grand  Commander 
de  facto. 

Q.  From  what  part  of  the  organization  or 
order  did  you  come  to  the  conclusion  that 
when  you  acted  as  Grand  Commander,  Dr. 
Bowles  would  have  a  right  to  command 
vou? 

A.  Dr.  Wilson  said  Bowles  had  said  so 
limself.  That  is  all  I  did  know. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  that  was  any 
)art  of  the  order,  military  or  civil? 

A.  I  suppose  it  was;  I  was  so  instructed; 
and  I  presume  that  the  officer  who  had 
seen  service  would  rank  those  who  had  not 
>een  in  the  service ;  Colonel  Bowles  had 
been  in  the  Mexican  war. 

Q.    How    long,   after    you   went    home, 
did  you  elect  the  officers  of  your  county 
emple  ? 

A.    Within  a  week  or  so  of  the  22d  of 
^ebruary,  which  was  said  to  be  the  anni 
versary    of    the    order,   when    Logan  was 
elected  Grand  Seignior. 

Q.  How  many  members  had  been  taken 
nto  the  order  up  to  that  time? 
A.  I  have  no  means  of  knowing. 
Q.  Had  there  been  a  temple  established 
n  each  township  at  that  time  ? 
A.  I  think  not. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  participate  in  the  estab- 
shing  of  temples  after  that  ? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q,  Did  you  ever  meet  with  temples  after 
hat? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  when  we  wanted  to  elect  a 
ouple  of  Justices  of  the  Peace,  sometime 
n  March,  I  think,  I  went  once  to  a  meeting. 
Q.  Who  presided  at  that  meeting? 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


138 


A.  I  believe  I  did,  as  Deputy  Grand  Com 
mander. 

Q.  Did  you  correspond  with  members  of 
the  order  at  that  time  ? 

A.  I  can  not  say  that  I  did;  except  that 
about  the  time  of  Dodd's  arrest,  I  wrote  a 
letter  to  each  of  the  major  generals  in  the 
order,  one  to  Mr.  Humphreys,  one  to  Mr. 
Milligan,  who,  I  remember,  was  sick  in  bed 
as  the  answer  informed  me,  and  one  I  wrote 
to  Dr.  Bowles,  which  was  to  be  taken  by  a 
man  by  the  name  of  Rainbow,  but  it  was 
never  sent. 

Q.  What  was  the  substance  of  those 
letters  ? 

A.  It  was  that  Dr.  Wilson  had  come  to 
me  and  said  he  had  not  talked  with  me  for 
two  or  three  months;  that  he  now  considered 
it  his  duty  to  do  so ;  that  as  I  was  Deputy 
Grand  Commander,  and  Dodd  was  arrested, 
I  must  write  to  Vallandigham  and  to  each 
of  the  major  generals;  I  did  not  want  to  do 
so,  but  he  insisted,  and  I  did  write  to  Mr. 
Humphreys,  Mr.  Milligan,  John  C.  Walker, 
and  Mr.  Vallandigham;  I  wrote  to  Mr. 
Bowles,  but  as  I  understood  he  was  arrested 
for  harboring  deserters,  I  did  not  send  the 
letter. 

Q.  How  did  you  write  to  Vallandigham? 

A.  As  Supreme  Grand  Commander  of  the 
Supreme  Council  of  the  United  States. 

Q.  How  did  you  sign  your  name  to  this 
letter  ? 

A.  Horace  Heffren. 

Q.  Did  you  sign  it  officially  or  unofficially? 

A.  I  do  not  recollect ;  I  might  have  signed 
it  officially.  Dr.  Wilson  said  that  as  Mr. 
Dodd  was  arrested,  he  thought  it  best  to  do 
something.  Thomas  G.  Wilson,  of  Camp- 
bellsburg,  Washington  county,  had  been  to 
Illinois,  and  pretended  to  have  seen  the 
Grand  Commander  of  the  State  of  Illinois, 
and  reported  to  me  that  Illinois  was  ready 
to  raise,  and  was  only  waiting  for  Indiana, 
I  told  him  I  did  not  know  about  such  a 
movement,  but  thought  it  was  best  to  go 
slow  and  not  get  themselves  into  trouble. 
Wilson  wanted  me  to  write  to  the  Supreme 
Grand  Commander,  and  also  to  the  major 
generals  in  the  State;  I  talked  with  him  some 
time,  and  said  it  was  best  not  to  write,  but  he 
insisted,  and  I  wrote.  He  said  Dodd  was  ar 
rested,  and  asked  what  shall  we  do — sub 
mit  or  fight?  that  was  the  substance  of  my 
letter. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  we  ? 

A.  I  mean  the  members  of  the  Order  of 
American  Knights. 

Q.  You  forgot  your  resolution  to  have 
nothing  more  to  do  with  the  order,  did  you 
not? 

•A.  I.  acceded  to  Dr.  Wilson's  earnest  so 
licitations  and  wrote,  although  I  considered 
myself  out  of  the  order  ? 

Q.  Did  these  gentlemen  write  back? 

A.  None  but  Mr.  Milligan  and  Mr.  Hum 
phreys.  Mr.  Milligan's  letter  was  signed 


by  some  gentleman  as  "student,"  as  he 
was  sick,  and  it  said  that  it  would  not  do 
at  the  present  time,  but  we  must  abide  our 
time. 

Q.  What  did  he  say  about  the  salvation 
of  God? 

A.  He  did  not  say  any  thing  about  the 
salvation  of  God,  for  I  did  not  think  it  was 
near  any  of  us  at  that  time. 

Q.  What  did  Mr.  Humphreys  say  ? 

A.  Last  spring,  coming  to  Indianapolis,  we 
met  at  the  Green  Castle  Junction,  had  a 
talk  about  the  order  and  its  organization, 
and  Mr.  Humphreys  said  it  would  not  do. 
We  had  got  to  depend  on  Chicago;  he 
said  he  was  for  his  country,  right  or  wrong, 
and  would  have  nothing  to  do  with  it.  He 
advised  me  to  quit  the  order,  and  I  said  I 
had  quit  it,  and  would  have  nothing  more 
to  do  with  the  order ;  and  I  told  him  about 
Mr.  Moss  and  Malott  on  the  17th  of  Feb 
ruary  ;  Humphreys  said  he  was  glad  of  it. 

The  Judge  Advocate  here  objected  to  this 
class  of  testimony. 

Q.  In  regard  to  resisting  the  draft,  did 
not  Mr.  Humphreys  say  that  it  would  not 
do  to  resist  the  law  ? 

A.  He  did;  he  said  so  in  the  letter  and 
in  the  conversation  I  have  referred  to. 

Q.  What  did  he  say  about  the  men  hav 
ing,  or  not  having,  authority  to  use  his  name 
at  the  February  meeting  ? 

A.  He  said  it  was  without  his  knowledge 
or  consent,  and  they  had  no  right  to  it;  he 
said  he  was  for  his  country  right  or  wrong, 
and  for  the  Constitution  as  it  was. 

Q.  What  did  Mr.  Milligan  say  ? 

A.  I  received  that  letter  signed  "student;" 
I  suppose  written  by  a  student  in  his  office. 

Q.  Did  Vallandigham  write  to  you? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  did  not  have  the  honor  of 
receiving  a  letter  from  him;  I  was  too  small 
fry  I  expect. 

Q.  What  was  the  date  of  your  letter  to 
this  gentleman  ? 

A.  I  should  judge  it  must  have  been  two 
months  ago ;  it  was  just  after  Mr.  Dodd  was 
arrested. 

Q.  How  many  members  were  at  that  time 
enrolled  in  your  county  ? 

A.  From  what  I  understood,  there  must 
have  been  one  thousand  or  eleven  hundred. 

Q.  Who  organized  the  county? 

A,  I  did;  together  with  Dr.  Wilson  and 
Mr.  Logan. 

Q.  When  did  you  initiate  the  Hon.  M.  C. 
Kerr? 

A.  At  Mr.  Graff's  saddlery;  it  must  have 
been  near  Tuesday  night,  the  8th  of  March, 
1864. 

Q.  How  often  did  you  meet  with  the 
temple  in  New  Albany? 

A.  Only  those  two  nights;  I  do  not  think 
Mr.  Kerr  was  there  the  first  night,  but  he 
was  there  the  second. 

Q.  When  did  you  organize  them? 

A.  It  could  not  have   been  far  from  the 


134 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


28th  of  March;  it  might  have  been  about 
the  25th  of  February  that  we  organized  that 
temple. 

Q.  How  many  members  did  you  take  in  ? 

A.  About  twenty  or  thirty. 

Q.  Did  you  take  in  some  each  time  you 
met? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  of  course  that  was  my  busi 
ness. 

Q.  Were  you  allowed  any  thing  for  the 
organization  of  this  temple? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  suppose  I  was ;  but  1  never 
got  any  thing,  with  the  exception  of  what 
Mr.  Jones,  of  New  Albany,  paid  me,  which 
was  about  three  dollars,  which  paid  my  ex 
penses  to  New  Albany  and  back. 

Q,  Had  you  any  correspondence  with  other 
members  ? 

A.  I  never  wrote  any  letters  in  regard  to 
the  order  save  to  Messrs.  Vallandigham, 
Humphreys  and  Milligan,  and  one  letter 
I  wrote  to  Dr.  Bowles,  but  did  not  send. 

Q.  About  what  time  did  you  appoint  Wil 
liam  P.  Green  to  act  as  your  proxy  ? 

A.  I  think  it  was  in  June. 

Q.  At  what  time  did  Dr.  Wilson  show  you 
the  thousand  dollars? 

A.  It  could  not  have  been  far  from  the 
middle  of  June,  1864,  or  when  he  came  back 
from  seeing  Dr.  Bowles  at  French  Lick 
Springs. 

Q.  How  long  was  that  before  hp  told  you 
to  write  to  these  men,  in  regard  to  what 
you  should  do? 

A.  The  money  was  shown  to  me  some 
tim  ein  June;  the  writing  was  some  time  in 
September.  I  know  it  was  near  the  time 
of  Dodd's  arrest.  Mr.  Dodd  had  not  been 
arrested  when  he  showed  me  the  money. 
I  do  not  know  whether  he  had  been  to 
Chicago,  or  to  Dr.  Bowies'.  I  should  state 
in  regard  to  Mr.  Milligan,  I  think  that  he  was 
present  at  the  second  day  of  the  Grand 
Council  in  February.  I  have  not  a  distinct 
and  positive  recollection  of  his  being  there; 
what  makes  me  think  he  was  there  is  be 
cause  Harry  Yandegrift  was  very  anxious 
that  Mr.  Milligan  should  be  nominated  for 
Governor. 

Q.  When  was  the  ritual  changed,  if  ever  ? 

A.  Mr.  Dodd,  at  the  February  meeting, 
reported  a  constitution,  by-laws,  etc.,  oaths 
and  obligations,  but  when  they  were  changed 
J  do  not  know ;  those  published  are  not  the 
same  as  those  read ;  I  am  certain  of  that. 
I  do  not  know  who  changed  them,  or  any 
thing  about  it. 

Q.  How  were  the  ordinary  expenses  of 
the  order  kept  up? 

A.  By  the  initiation  fee;  $1  for  the  first 
degree,  $1  50  for  the  second,  $2  50  for  the 
third  degree,  and  twenty  cents  per  month ; 
and  they  had  a  right  to  tax  if  they  saw 
fit. 

Q.  How  were  the  expenses  of  the  Su 
preme  Grand  Council  of  the  United  States 
to  be  kept  up? 


A.  I  do  not  know,  except  by  contribu 
tions  from  grand  and  branch  temples. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  the  expenses  of 
the  Grand  Council  of  the  State  of  Indiana 
were  estimated  at? 

A.  I  do  not. 

Q.  What  was  the  salary  of  the  Secretary? 

A.  My  impression  was  that  it  was  to  be 
eight  hundred  dollars  per  year. 

Q.  Do  you  know  any  thing  else  about  the 
expenses  of  the  order  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Mr.  Green,  then,  lied  to  you  when  he 
returned,  or  pretended  to  return  from  the 
Grand  Council,  did  he  not? 

A.  Either  her  or  Mr.  Dodd,  or  my  brother; 
Mr.  Dodd  said  that  Mr.  Green  did  not  get 
in. 

Q.  How  did  you  sign  that  proxy? 

A.  I  signed  it  "  Horace  Heftren,"  and  I 
gave  him  a  letter  of  introduction  to  Dodd 
beside;  I  do  not  know  whether  I  signed  it 
officially  or  not,  but  I  presume  it  would  be 
signed  officially  to  Dodd. 

Q.  At  what  time  did  you  say  the  rebel 
raid  was  to  be  made  in  Indiana? 

A.  I  did  not  say  that  a  rebel  raid  was  to 
be  made  in  Indiana. 

Q.  The  raid  in  which  you  were  to  parti 
cipate  ? 

A.  I  did  not  state  that  either. 

Q.  What  was  to  take  place  on  the  16th 
of  August? 

A.  An  uprising  in  the  States  of  Indiana, 
Kentucky,  Ohio  and  Missouri;  the  Confed 
erates  were  to  come  up  through  Cumber 
land  Gap ;  but  we  did  not  rise,  and  the 
rebels  did  not  come. 

Q.  What  was  the  name  of  that  man  who 
was  sent  to  Missouri  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know;  nor  whether  ho  got 
there,  or  had  any  communication  with 
Price. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  he  had  corre 
spondence  with  General  Price  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  understood  so  from  Dr. 
Wilson,  George  R  Harris  and  Harry  Van- 
degrift',  of  Salem. 

Q.  Who  was  sent  to  Richmond  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  inquire? 

A.  I  did,  of  Mr.  Wilson  and  Harris;  but 
I  did  not  find  out  from  them;  they  did  not 
say  they  knew. 

Q.  Who  told  you  about  this  emblem  to 
save  property? 

A.  It  was  to  save  the  property  of  those 
belonging  to  the  order.  I  only  told  it  to 
two  men,  my  father  and  father-in-law. 

Q.  Did  they  avlfil  themselves  of  it? 

A.  I  do  not  know. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  make  one  ?  • 

A.  1  told  my  wife  to  make  one;  but  she 
did  not. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  see  one? 

A.  No,  sir;  nor  did  I  see  any  person 
making  one. 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


135 


•  Q.  What  banner  were  you  to  march  un 
der  when  you  rallied? 

A.  The  banner  they  carried  in  the  army. 

Q.  In  what  army  ? 

A.  The  Confederate  army,  of  course.  If 
we  could  not  gain  a  North-western  Confed 
eracy,  we  were  to  join  our  fortunes  with 
the  South. 

Q.  How  would  you  know  when  you  could 
not  get  a  North-western  Confederacy? 

A.  As  any  fool  would  know  when  he  got 
whipped. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  the  Committee  of 
Thirteen  was  appointed? 

A.  I  do  not  know,  except  that  Mr.  Harris 
said  he  knew  more  about  that  Committee 
of  Thirteen  than  I  did. 

Q.  When  was  it  that  Mr.  Harris  told  you 
this? 

A.  It  was  after  I  came  back  from  Terre 
Haute.  He  laughed  at  me,  and  said  he 
knew  better  than  I  did  what  was  going 
on  in  Terre  Haute. 

Q.  Did  he  mention  the  Committee  of 
Thirteen  ? 

A.  He  and  I  have  talked  about  it  per 
haps  fifty  times;  he  spoke  of  it  and  its  ar 
rangement,  and  thought  the  thing  was 
played  out,  and  said  that  the  thing  might 
go  to  the  devil,  for  all  he  cared,  i  think 
Mr.  Harris  has  had  nothing  to  do  with  it 
since,  probably,  last  winter.  He  never 
formally  withdrew,  that  I  knew  of. 

Q.  When  did  you  first  know  of  this  Com 
mittee  of  Thirteen,  connected  with  the 
order? 

A.  When  Mr.  Bailey  initiated  us;  twelve 
beside  myself,  which  was  emblematical  of 
the  thirteen  original  States,  and  also  of  the 
thirteen  stars  on  the  flag;  that  was  before 
the  election  of  1863. 

Q.  Was  not  that  committee  appointed  to 
save  the  expense  of  calling  tha  Grand 
Council  together? 

A.  I  never  was  present  but  at  one  meet 
ing  of  the  Grand  Council,  and  it  was  not 
spoken  of  then. 

Q.  Did  you  hear  any  thing  said  about 
the  Committee  of  Thirteen  at  that  meet 
ing? 

A.  I  might,  but  if  so,  I  have  forgotten  it. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  any  thing  about 
this  Committee  of  Thirteen  before  last 
June  ? 

A.  I  did,  sir;  I  never  heard  any  thing 
since  June,  that  I  recollect;  1  heard  of  it 
when  Mr.  Bailey  initiated  us,  sometime  in 
September,  1863;  the  Committee  of  Thir 
teen  belongs  exclusively  to  the  Grand 
Council  of  the  State. 

Q.  Were  the  county  temples  instructed 
in  relation  to  it? 

A.  I  can  not  state,  except  that  I  was  so 
instructed,  and  so  were  the  gentlemen  that 
were  initiated  with  me. 

Q.  This  committee,  you  say,  had  power  to 
appoint  ten  murderers,  or  men  who  had 


the  dark  work  of  taking  care  of  Governor 
Morton  ? 

A.  1  did  not  say  they  appointed  ten  mur 
derers ;  1  said  they  were  a  committee  to 
select  ten  men  to  take  care  of  Governor 
Morton,  and  hold  him  as  a  hostage ;  or  fail 
ing  in  that,  to  take  care  of  him. 

Q.  What  do  you  understand  the  words 
"  take  care  of  him,"  to  mean? 

A.  Just  what  any  sensible  man  would; 
that  if  they  could  not  use  him  for  their 
own  purposes,  they  might  take  him  out  and 
kill  him. 

Q.   When  did  you  first  understand  that? 

A.  I  think  it  must  have  been  about  June, 
1864;  and  I  packed  tip  my  carpet-sack  to 
go  and  tell  Governor  Morton  in  regard  to 
it,  but  my  wife  was  taken  sick,  and  I  did 
not  go.  I  tried  to  communicate  with  him 
when  I  was  in  prison-  but  I  could  not  do  it. 

Q.   When  did  Wilson  tell  you  this? 

A.  I  think  he  must  have  been  to  Chicago 
or  New  York,  or  French  Lick  Springs;  1 
am  not  certain;  he  told  me  when  he  came 
from  one  of  those  places.  I  knew  there 
was  a  Grand  Council  somewhere  about  June 
that  I  did  not  attend;  and  there  was  a  Su 
preme  Grand  Council  held  in  Chicago,  to 
which  I  gave  Green  my  proxy. 

Q.  Were  you  told  this  before  or  after 
you  gave  Green  your  proxy  to  go  to  Chi 
cago? 

A.  I  can  not  say  for  certain,  but  I  pre 
sume  it  would  be  after. 

Q.  Then  you  had  heard  this  statement  of 
Wilson  in  regard  to  the  appointment  of  ten 
men  to  do  this  dirty  work? 

A.  My  impression  is  that  I  had,  but  I  am 
not  positive. 

Q.  Could  you  not  have  let  Governor  Mor 
ton  know  that  it  would  be  best  for  him  to  bo 
careful ? 

A.  I  suppose  I  could,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  believe  that  those  ten  men 
would  do  this  to  Governor  Morton? 

A.  I  did,  sir;  I  had  good  reasons  for  be 
lieving  it. 

Q.  Did  Kerr  come  to  see  you  when  this 
alarm  was  got  up? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  did  not  meet  him  when  he  wa* 
on  his  way  to  Washington  county,  did 
you? 

A.  No,  sir;  or  if  I  did,  he  did  not  inform 
me  as  to  his  business.  I  never  knew  of 
Mr.  Kerr  doing  any  thing  but  what,  in  my 
judgment,  was  right  and  proper. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  talk  with  Dr.  Bowles  on 
this  matter  ? 

A.  Never,  in  my  life. 

Q.  How  far  did  you  live  from  Dr.  Bowles? 

A.  About  thirty  to  thirty-five  miles. 

Q.  Why  was  this  flag  to  be  put  on  tlie 
property  of  members  of  the  order  and  their 
friends? 

A.  To  save  our  property.  It  was  under 
stood  that  property  that  was  not  so  designa- 


136 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


ted  would  be  destroyed  when  a  rebel  raid 
should  take  place;  but  if  that  flag  was  dis 
played  the  destroying  angel  would  pass 
over  it,  and  it  would  not  be  disturbed. 

Q.  You  were  very  anxious  to  save  Gover 
nor  Morton,  but  did  care  about  your  neigh 
bors,  did  you  ? 

A.  1  had  nothing  to  do  with  them.  My 
feelings  were  that  I  did  not  care  after  Mor 
gan  came  through,  and  they  treated  me  as 
they  did;  I  mean  the  soldiers  under  Hob- 
son. 

[Objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advocate.] 
Q.  When  did  you  meet  Felix  G.  Stidger 
first? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  I  ever  saw  him  till 
I  saw  him  on  the  stand  here.  I  do  not 
recollect  any  conversation  with  him  in  Sa 
lem. 

Q.  Did  you  meet  a  gentleman  like  Stid 
ger,  from  Kentucky,  to  whom  you  said  you 
were  expecting  an  envoy  or  commissioner 
from  Kentucky  to  bring  you  word  about 
the  disbanding  of  some  of  Forrest's  regi 
ments? 

[Question  objected  to  by  the  JudgeAdvo- 
cate.] 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  remarked  as 
follows: 

The  witness,  Stidger,  has  fixed  the  time 
and  place  when  he  had  two  several  conver 
sations  with  this  man  Heffren,  and  he  has 
given  the  substance  of  these  conversations: 
I  now  propose  to  show  by  this  witness  that 
no  such  conversation  ever  took  place  at 
either  of  the  times  mentioned  by  Stidger. 
I  make  him  my  witness  for  that  purpose 
in  order  to  save  time;  if  this  is  not  admit 
ted,  I  shall  introduce  him  as  a  witness  for 
the  defense  afterward. 

To  which  the  Judge  Advocate  replied: 
This  is  the  rule  of  law:  that  the  accused 
have  a  right  to  cross-examine  this  witness 
as  to  any  matter  on  which  I  have  examined 
him  in  chief;  only  by  courtesy  and  consent 
of  the  opposite  party,  can  they  step  outside 
and  enter  upon  new  ground.  If  that  con 
sent  is  yielded,  then  1  may  cross-examine 
him  upon  that  new  matter;  but  under  my 
objection  they  can  not  introduce  new  mat 
ter.  They  may  recall  him,  and  place  him 
upon  the  stand  as  their  witness. 
Question  withdrawn. 

Q.  In  the  month  of  May  last,  from  the 
4th  to  the  8th,  in  the  town  of  Salem,  and 
at  the  Persise  House,  did  you,  or  did  you 
not  have  a  conversation  about  the  order, 
and  your  relations  with  it,  with  Felix  G. 
Stidger? 

A.  I  have  no  recollection  of  any  conver 
sation  with  him. 

Q.  At  that  time  and  place,  and  in  conver 
sation  with  Felix  G.  Stidger,  did  you  not 
inform  him  that  you  wished  to  see  him? 

A.  1  could  not  ask  him  that  if  I  did  not 

see  him,  and  I  do  not  recollect  seeing  him. 

Q.  Did  you  not  further  tell  him  that  you 


were  expecting  a  commissioner  from  cer 
tain  disbanded  rebel  regiments  in  Kentucky, 
and  that  you  had  mistaken  him  for  that 
commissioner? 

A.  I  do  not  recollect  any  conversation 
with  such  a  man,  or  of  such  an  import. 

Q.  If  you  had  had  such  a  conversation, 
would  you  not  remember  it? 

A.  I  do  not  know  whether  I  should  re 
member  it  or  not.  It  is  possible  some 
man  played  himself  off  on  Stidger  that 
time  for  me.  A  great  many  men  about 
Salem,  at  that  time,  were  expecting  a  man 
from  Cumberland  Gap  to  report  rebel 
movements.  My  diary  shows  that  I  was 
not  in  town  then. 

Q.  What  days  do  you  refer  to? 

A.  The  6th  and  7th,  and  27th  of  May. 
On  the  6th  of  May  I  was  making  a  speech 
in  Franklin  township;  on  the  7th  I  was  at 
Little  York  township;  and  on  the  26th  of 

May,  I  was  at school  house,  in  Madison 

township. 

Q.  How  far  is  that  from  Salem? 

A.  Ten  or  twelve  miles.  I  drove  my 
ponies,  I  recollect. 

Q.  Did  you  see  any  man  who  resembled 
Stidger? 

A.  I  do  not  recollect  any  one  of  his  per 
sonal  appearance.  There  was  a  tall,  stoop- 
shouldered,  black-whiskered  man,  called 
on  me  some  time  in  the  spring — Coffin  I 
suppose  it  was.  He  did  not  look  like  Stid 
ger  who  testified  here.  He  had  a  large 
Roman  nose. 

Q  Did  you  have  any  such  conversation 
with  Coffin  as  that  testified  to  by  Stidgor? 

A.  I  do  not  think  I  did.  I  thought  he- 
was  a  spy  or  a  detective.  I  believe  I  got 
rid  of  him  by  writing  a  letter  of  introduc 
tion  to  Judge  Carlton.  There  was 'a  way 
of  writing  a  letter  to  have  it  mean  the  op 
posite  of  its  purport.  For  instance,  I  wrote 
he  was  an  exceedingly  loyal  man,  and  then 
put  in  the  left  hand  corner  the  letters  0. 
A.  K,  with  a  dash  before  and  after  "0.  A. 
K.,"  the  first  letters  of  the  signal  of  dis 
tress,  which  gave  the  opposite  meaning  to 
the  letter. 

Q.  Did  you  not  act  while  in  prison  as  le 
gal  adviser  to  Stephen  Horsey? 

A.  I  did  not.  I  acted  as  a  legal  adviser 
to  no  one.  You  and  others  were  my  legal 
advisers,  and  I  could  not  get  you  up  to  my 
room  as  often  as  I  wanted  you. 

Q.  Did  not  Horsey  rely  on  your  advice 
as  a  lawyer? 

A.  I  can  not  say  that  he  did. 

Q  Are  not  you  and  Mr.  James  B.  Wilson 
on  bad  terms? 

A.  We  are  not. 

Q.  When  he  came  into  Court  the  other 
day,  did  you  not  say  angrily,  that  you 
would  like  to  know  whether  he  heard  the 
story  of  Haman  and  Mordecai,  of  his  being 
hung  on  the  gallows  he  had  built  for 
others? 


TREASON   TRIALS  AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


137 


A.  I  do  not  think  I  made  such  a  remark, 
but  thought  it  pretty  strong. 

RE-EXAMIXATION. 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate: 

1  understand  you  to  say  that  you  have 
no  recollection  of  having  any  conversation 
with  Felix  G.  Stidger.  Is  that  correct? 

A.  I  do  not  recollect  any  such  conversa 
tion.  He  might  have  had  such  a  conversa 
tion  with  some  one. 

Q.  Is  it  not  possible^  that  he  might  have 
had  such  a  conversation  with  you? 

A.  It  is,  but  I  do  not  recollect  it. 

Q.  In  regard  to  the  incidents  of  that  day, 
you  say  you  have  an  absence  of  recollec 
tion? 

A.  I  do. 

Q.  What  is  the  personal  appearance  of 
this  Mr.  Bailey,  of  Terre  Haute,  you  have 
referred  to? 

A.  He  is  a  man  about  twenty-five  years 
of  age.  I  understand  he  is  dead. 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  state  that  Mr. 
Humphreys  had  abandoned  this  order.  Were 
you  not  informed  by  a  letter  from  Hum 
phreys  and  others,  of  his  having  charge  of 
and  being  concerned  in  a  general  drill  at  a 
meeting  of  about  one  thousand  men  con 
nected  with  this  order,  on  or  about  the 
lines  of  Green,  Clay,  or  Sullivan  counties, 
during  the  month  of  September  last? 

A.  I  did  not  hear  of  it. 

Q.  Did  you  not  hear  of  his  drilling  mem 
bers  of  the  order  in  his  county  ? 

A.  Not  before  his  arrest,  or  since. 

Q.  Did  you  hear  of  his  assisting  to  arm 
members  of  the  order,  or  giving  instructions 
as  to  resisting  the  draft? 

A.  No,  sir.  He  said  a  great  many  men 
had  come  to  him  to  know7  whether  he 
would  fight,  and  he  told  them  to  go  home 
and  behave  themselves. 

Q.  Did  you  ever 'hear. of  his  advising  re 
sistance  to  the  draft? 

A.  I  never  did,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  meet  him  at  any  meeting 
of  the  order? 

A.  I  did  not,  sir. 

Q.  How  did  you  first  know  that  he  was  a 
member  of  the  order  ? 

A.  I  think  it  was  probably  the  letter  he 
wrote  to  me  last  fall. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  that  he  was  a  member 
of  the  order  from  that  letter? 

A.  I  am  not  positive. 

Q.  If  he  had  told  you  about  the  time  of 
the  June  meeting  here,  and  previous  to  that, 
that  the  thing  was  a  humbug,  and  he  had 
abandoned  it,  why  did  you  write  to  him  as 
a  major  general,  to  hear  whether  you  were 
to  come  to  arms  on  the  arrest  of  Dodd  ? 

A.  At  the  request  of  Dr.  Wilson,  he  in 
sisted  that  I'  should  write  to  all  the  major 
generals;  that  I  was  the  only  one  to  write; 
and  I,  as  Deputy  Grand  Commander,  wrote 
to  him  as  major  general.  That  was  after  he 


told  me  that  he  had  abandoned  it,  as  it  was 
a  humbug.  I  wrote  to  him  in  the  same 
manner  that  I  wrote  to  Mr.  Milligan,  but  I 
wrote  a  little  more  to  Mr.  Vallandigham; 
and  the  purport  of  it  was  to  see  whether  we 
should  back  out  or  fight,  and  if  to  fight,  to 
bring  the  heads  together  at  once.  It  was  only 
to  accommodate  Dr.  Wilson  that  I  did  it. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Friday,  November  11, 1864,  at  10  o'clock, 
A.  M. 


COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         ) 
November  11,  18G4,  10  o'clock,  A.  M.  J 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  ad 
journment. 

All  the  members  present.  Also,  the 
Judge  Advocate,  the  accused,  and  their 
counsel. 

The  proceedings  of  yesterday  were  read 
and  approved. 

The  following  Special  Field  Order  was 
then  read  by  the  Judge  Advocate: 

HEADQUABTEBS  DEPARTMENT  OF  THE  CUMBERLAND,  ) 
Atlanta,  Ga.,  October  15,  1864.     j 

Special  Field  Orders,  No.  275. 


*  *  *  *  1.  The  resignations  of  the  fol 
lowing  named  officers  are  accepted,  to  take 
effect  from  this  date: 

Colonel  J.  T.  Wilder,  17th  Indiana 
Mounted  Infantry.  Disability. 

By  command  of  Major  General  Thomas. 
SOUTHARD  HOFFMAN, 

Assistant  Adjutant  General. 

Some  of  the  members  of  the  Commission 
having  expressed  a  desire  to  ask  Mr. 
Heffren  some  questions,  he  was  called  to 
the  stand,  and  the  following  questions  were 
submitted  : 

Question  by  the  Court : 

Do  you  know  from  your  own  knowledge, 
or  from  any  member  of  the  order,  how 
many  States  were  represented  in  the  Grand 
Council  of  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty, 
at  any  of  their  meetings  ? 

Answer.  I  was  told  by  Dr.  Wilson,  when 
he  returned  from  Chicago,  that  they  were 
all  represented  but  five ;  all  the  States  both 
North  and  South. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  what  five  were  not 
represented  ? 

A.  Florida  and  South  Carolina  I  remem 
ber  being  mentioned,  but  the  other  three  I 
am  not  sure  about. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  •  any  thing  about  a 
session  of  this  order  about  the  time  of  the 
Democratic  Convention  at  Chicago? 

A.  1  know  nothing  of  it  except  what  Dr. 
Wilson  said  at  a  meeting  we  had  called  to 
raise  money  to  buy  substitutes  for  the  poor 
men  drafted  in  our  county.  He  there  stated 
that  the  object  was  to  concentrate  all  the 
votes  against  McClellan,  and  prevent  hifl 
nomination  at  Chicago. 


138 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


Q.  Do  you  know  the  names  of  any  who 
were  there  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  whether  he  gave  any. 
At  the  called  meeting  there  were  present 
Colonel  Menaugh,  Mr.  Kerr,  General 
Cravens,  I  think,  Mr.  Trotter,  Mr.  Hamil 
ton,  Mr.  Logan,  I  think,  Mr.  Spears,  Isaac 
Baker,  George  Beck,  R  G.  Weir,  a  Doctor, 
whose  name  I  forgot,  he  used  to  live  in  Little 
York ;  Dr.  Newland  was  present,  and  Mr. 
Joseph  Denny;  there  must  have  been  fifty; 
the  Sheriff  of  Washington  county,  B.  F. 
Nicholson,  was  in  the  room. 

Q.  Were  these  persons  members  of  the 
order? 

A.  Some  were;  I  do  not  think  Dr.  New- 
land  ever  was  a  member  of  it. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  this  order  having  any 
connection  with  or  interest  in  blockade  run 
ning,  with  reference  to  arms  ? 

A.  I  was  so  told  by  members  of  the  order; 
I  was  told  by  Mr.  Dodd  and  by  Dr.  Wilson 
that  Vice  President  Stephens  had  gone  to 
Nassau ;  that  a  good  many  arms  and  ammu 
nition  had  been  shipped  there  for  the  South 
ern  States  from  England,  but  could  not  get 
through  the  blockade,  and  he  went  to  make 
arrangements  with  Commissioners  from  the 
North  to  have  them  shipped  to  Canada,  and 
thence  distributed  through  the  North,  for 
the  use  of  the  military  part  of  this  organi 
zation.  They  were  to  come  to  Chicago, 
through  Canada. 

Q.  Do  you  say  General  Cravens  was  pres 
ent  at  that  meeting? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  think  he  was;  but  may  be 
mistaken.  I  was  Chairman  of  the  meeting; 
and  it  was  held  in  Salem,  in  the  Grand  Jury 
room,  in  the  Court  house,  on  the  Monday 
after  General  Harlan,  of  Kentucky,  spoke  at 
Salem.  At  that  meeting  a  great  deal  was 
said  conversationally,  as  to  what  was  to  be 
done,  and  several  persons  asked  me  to  make 
an  announcement,  which  T  did,  requesting 
that  each  McClellan  Club  in  the  county 
would  meet  at  2  o'clock  the  next  day,  (Sun 
day,)  as  the  business  was  urgent,  to  send 
five  delegates  from  each  township  to  meet 
at  Salem  on  the  next  day. 

Q.  Was  General  Cravens  a  member  of  the 
order  ? 

A.  Not  that  I  know  of.  Dr.  Wilson 
initiated  persons  that  I  knew  nothing  of; 
but  I  do  not  think  he  was  a  member. 

Q.  You  have  seen  those  shells  exhibited 
here,  have  you  not  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  them  before? 

A.  Not  those,  but  some  similar  to  them. 

Q.  State  when,  where,  and  under  what 
circumstances  ? 

A.  I  can  not  state  the  exact  time,  but  it 
was  sometime  last  summer.  Mr.  Persise, 
who  keeps  a  hotel  in  Salem,  called  me,  and 
introduced  me  to  a  gentleman  who  was 
stopping  there ;  he  requested  me  to  go  to 
his  room,  and  I  went — to  the  stranger's 


room.  He  had  a  box  something  like  a  con 
ductor's  box,  but  much  deeper.  He  asked 
me  if  I  had  ever  seen  these  things;  I  said  I 
had  not.  Mr.  Persise  told  me  he  requested 
him  to  register  his  name,  but  he  did  not. 
He  also  had  a  hand  grenade.  As  soon  as  I 
saw  the  one  in  Court,  I  saw  it  was  on  the 
same  principle.  He  said  what  it  was  to 
be  used  for,  but  I  did  not  exactly  under 
stand  him,  and  did  not  talk  much  to  him. 
He  had  a  ritual  of  the  first  degree,  and 
asked  me  if  it  was  true.  He  was  a  shortish 
man,  about  five  feet  eight,  or  ten,  wore 
specs,  had  dark  hair  and  whiskers.  He 
represented  himself  as  coming  from  back 
of  Louisville.  I  concluded  he  was  a  Detec 
tive,  and  did  not  have  as  much  to  say  as  I 
otherwise  might,  for  I  had  been  threatened 
with  arrest,  I  did  not  learn  his  name; 
neither  do  I  know  if  he  was  in  the  habit  of 
wearing  spectacles,  or  not. 

Q,  Do  you  know  if  he  was  a  member  of 
the  order? 

A.  He  said  he  was;  but  I  did  not  try  him. 
He  unscrewed  the  hand-grenade,  and  showed 
me  the  nipples  on  the  inner  shell,  and  that 
is  how  I  recognized  it  as  soon  as  the  Judge 
Advocate  brought  it  up  in  Court. 

Q.  For  what  purpose  did  he  say  it  was  to 
be  used? 

A.  For  the  purpose  of  destroying  Gov 
ernment  property.  The  Greek  fire,  he  said, 
had  been  improved,  and  was  much  better 
than  that  used  before.  It  was  to  be  so  ar 
ranged  that  a  person  could  take  it  in  a  viol 
and  walk  along  a  building,  and  throw  it 
down,  and  it  could  be  so  prepared  in  regard 
to  its  strength,  as  to  take  fire  after  three  or 
four,  or  more  hours;  and  neither  vinegar, 
water  nor  molasses  would  put  it  out.  I  was 
told  by  Booking,  when  in  prison,  how  it  was 
made;  he  said  it  was  bi-sulphate  of  carbon 
and  phosphorus. 

Q,  Was  the  man  you  saw  at  Salem,  Mr. 
Booking? 

A.  I  can  not  say  positively;  he  is  a  man 
who  fits  his  description  as  near  as  possible, 
but  I  can  not  positively  swear  to  his 
identity.  Mr.  Humphreys  said,  from  my 
description,  after  Bocking's  arrest,  that 
he  was  the  same  man.  I  am  not  certain 
he  is. 

Q.  You  may  Describe  his  personal  appear 
ance. 

A.  He  had  on  pretty  much  the  same 
clothes  as  "Booking  had;  he  wore  glasses, 
and  talked  very  much  like  Booking. 

Q.  Why  was  he  exhibiting  this  Greek  fire 
and  the  hand-grenades? 

A.  I  can  not  tell  why. 

Q.  What  was  his  professed  object? 

A.  He  wanted  to  know  whether  I  had 
seen  these  inventions,  and  asked  whether  I 
had  not  heard  that  Government  stores  and 
boats  had  been  burned  at  St.  Louis  and 
Louisville.  lie  then  said,  in  reference  to 
the  Greek  fire,  "  That  is  what  did  it."  I 


TREASON  TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


139 


answered  that  I  had  heard  of  these  shells, 
but  had  not  seen  them. 

Q.  Was  he  a  member  of  the  order  ? 

A.  He  claimed  to  be  such.  Mr.  Persise 
ought  to  know  better  than  1  do.  He  asked 
me  if  I  recollected  him  about  the  time  I 
was  arrested  ;  and  when  he  told  me  of  these 
circumstances,  I  remembered  them. 

Q.  Did  Booking  make  this  communica 
tion  to  you  as  a  member  of  the  order? 

A.  That  is  what  I  understood,  sir.  I  did 
not  know  whether  he  professed  to  be  a 
member  of  the  order  for  the  purpose  of 
finding  out  something,  and  reporting  it,  or 
whether  he  was  a  bona  fide  member.  I  mis 
trusted  him  as  a  bona  fide  member ;  but  sub 
sequent  events  proved  that  he  was.  I  was 
confirmed  in  my  judgment  that  he  was  a 
member  from  what  he  told  me  after  I  was 
put  in  prison  with  him.  I  reported  to  Col 
onel  Warner  what  I  knew  of  the  gentle 
man.  He  was  released  on  parole  on  the 
same  day  Humphreys  was  put  in  with  me. 

Q.  Why  did  you  report  him? 

A.  I  reported  to  Colonel  Warner  that  he 
took  a  letter  out  for  a  prisoner  in  the  next 
cell.  I  did  so,  because  I  did  not  want  to  be 
accused  of  being  with  a  man  who  was  try 
ing  to  get  out  and  injure  me  afterward. 

Q.  Is  Mr.  Booking  a  member  of  the 
order  ? 

A.  I  understand  he  is;  he  told  me  so 
himself. 

Q.  In  this  same  conversation,  did  he  tell 
you  that  he  exhibited  these  machines  to 
any  body  else;  and  if  so,  to  whom? 

A.  I  can  not  say  positively  whether  he 
did  or  did  riot;  it  seems  to  me  he  said  some 
thing  about  exhibiting  it  in  Louisville. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  that  Mr.  Booking 
told  you  this  while  he  was  in  prison  with 
you? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  and  the  same  conversation 
took  place  with  him  in  Salem,  if  he  is  the 
same  man. 

Q.  Will  you  describe  the  man  you  saw  at 
Salem  ? 

A.  He  was  a  man,  I  should  judge,  about 
five  feet  nine  inches  high,  darkish  hair;  he 
wore  glasses,  and,  from  his  accent,  I  should 
judge  him  to  be  a  foreigner;  he  is  between 
thirty-five  and  forty  years  of  age. 

Q.  Please  describe  Mr.  Booking. 

A.  I  will  have  to  give  the  same  descrip 
tion  for  him. 

Q.  Will  you  describe  Mr.  Booking  as  you 
saw  him  in  prison? 

A.  He  was  about  five  feet  nine  inches, 
wore  dark  clothes  and  glasses ;  a  foreigner, 
I  judge,  and  I  believe  he  told  me  so;  he  is 
from  thirty-five  to  forty  years  of  age,  and 
used  to  stay  at  Ryan  &  Elliot's  store,  he 
said,  in  this  city,  and  does  yet,  if  he  is  re 
leased. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  or  conversed  with  him 
since  you  saw  him  in  prison  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 


Q.  What  did  he  say,  at  any  time,  of  his 
being  a  member  of  the  order? 

A.  He  did  not  deny  it.  When  he  was  in 
the  same  cell  with  me  he  wanted  to  see  Mr. 
Gordon,  and  to  know  why  he  was  in  prison, 
and  said  that  they  had  got  suspicious  of 
him  because  he  would  not  tell  what  he 
knew,  and  that  was  the  reason  he  was  put 
in  prison. 

Q.  He  always  maintained  that  he  was  a 
member  of  the  order,  did  he  not? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  in  all  the  conversation  I  had 
with  him.  He  told  me,  also,  of  a  man  that 
was  put  in  with  him  for  horse-stealing. 
Colonel  Warner,  I  believe,  said  this  man 
was  a  spy,  for  he  had  my  name  on  his 
books. 

Q.  Was  this  man,  who  exhibited  the 
Greek  fire  at  Salem,  a  fleshy  or  a  lean 
man? 

A.  I  do  not  think  he  was  either. 

Q.  How  is  Booking,  fleshy  or  lean  ? 

A.  He  was  just  about  the  same  in  that 
respect.  The  very  instant  I  set  my  eyes  on 
Booking,  after  I  was  arrested,  I  took  him  to 
be  the  same  man  I  saw  at  Salem. 

Q.  Did  you  notice  the  color  of  his  eyes  ? 

A..  When  at  Salem  he  wore  glasses,  and  I 
never  saw  the  color  of  his  eyes. 

Q.  Were  both  these  persons  foreigners? 

A.  They  were.  I  called  him  at  first  a 
German;  but  he  said  that  he  was  a  Belgian. 

RE-CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  requested, 
as  a  courtesy,  the  privilege  of  cross-exam 
ination  of  the  witness  on  the  new  points 
brought  out  by  the  examination  by  the 
Court,  to  which  the  Judge  Advocate  waived 
all  objection. 

Question  by  the  accused: 

At  what  time  was  this  man,  who  exhib 
ited  the  Greek  fire,  at  the  Persise  House,  in 
Salem? 

Answer.  Sometime  last  summer. 

Q.  You  will  please  fix  the  time  as  near  as 
you  can? 

A.  I  can  not  fix  it  with  certainty,  except 
that  it  was  sometime  in  June,  I  judge.  I 
have  no  memorandum  to  fix  it  by.  It  was 
in  May  or  June. 

Q.  Did  he  give  you  his  name  ? 

A.  He  did  not. 

Q.  Why  did  he  refuse  to  give  it? 

A.  I  did  not  ask  him  for  it. 

Q,  How  did  he  register  his  name? 

A.  Mr.  Persise  said  he  refused  to  register 
his  name. 

Q.  Is  Mr.  Persise  a  member  of  the  or 
der? 

A.  He  is. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  this  man  you  saw 
at  Salem  is  a  member  of  the  order,  from 
any  thing  except  from  what  he  said  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  test  him  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 


140 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


Q.  You  stated,  did  you  not,  that  after 
you  saw  Booking  conceal  this  letter  fora  pris 
oner,  you  told  Colonel  Warner  of  the  mat 
ter? 

A.  I  told  Colonel  Warner  of  his  taking  a 
letter  out  for  a  prisoner  in  the  next  cell, 
which  was  passed  to  him  through  a  crack. 
Colonel  Warner  told  me  that  this  man  had 
my  name  on  his  book.  There  was  a  secret 
back  pocket  in  the  lining  of  his  coat,  be 
tween  the  shoulders,  in  which  he»  put  the 
letter.  I  saw  him  put  it  there,  and  take  it 
out  with  him  when  he  was  released,  on 
parole. 

Q.  At  what  time  was  this  ? 

A.  I  think  it  was  when  they  called  for 
him  and  he  was  released  on  parole.  Mr. 
Humphreys  was  put  in  the  same  cell  with 
me  after  his  release.  I  think  I  told  Col 
onel  Warner  I  thought  it  very  strange  he 
should  be  released,  and  we  sfeould  be 
kept  in  ? 

Q.  How  did  you  come  to  make  this  state 
ment  to  Colonel  Warner  ? 

A.  From  the  fact  that  I  did  not  want  any 
body  in  the  cell  next  to  me,  who  had  con 
cealed  a  saw,  and  was  trying  to  cut  his  way 
out,  and  have  the  suspicion  of  assisting  in 
his  escape  rest  on  me,  and  suffer  punish 
ment  for  it.  I  thought  we  were  in  a  bad 
enough  scrape,  without  getting  into  a  worse 
one.  I  told  Colonel  Warner  to  search  his 
carpet  sack,  and  it  was  searched,  so  the 
sergeant  said. 

Q.  Did  you  not,  at  that  time,  commence 
making  arrangements  with  Colonel  Warner 
to  become  a  witness  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  and  I  made  no  arrangements 
with  the  Judge  Advocate.  When  he  spoke 
to  me  to  take  the  stand,  I  thought  he 
spoke  to  Dr.  Wilson  who  sat  behind  me, 
and  supposed  he  was  going  to  put  him  on 
the  stand,  until  he  spoke  to  me  the  second 
time.  Instead  of  making  any  arrange 
ment  to  be  put  on  the  stand,  on  the  con 
trary  I  told  the  Judge  Advocate  I  would 
not  be  put  on  the  stand  under  any  pledge 
or  promise,  and  only  on  the  condition  of 
making  a  full  and  true  statement,  for  if 
sworn  I  would  tell  the  truth. 

Q.  I  will  ask  you,  with  the  permission  of 
the  Judge  Advocate,  whether  that  morn 
ing,  before  dinner,  you  did  not  have  a 
conversation  with  Governor  Morton  or 
General  Hovey,  either  with  one  or  both  of 
them? 

A.  I  did.  The  conversation  was  confi 
dential. 

Q.  Did  you  not  let  them  know  that  you 
were  willing  to  become  a  witness? 

A.  I  think  General  Hovey  asked  me  if  I 
would  be  a  witness;  I  said  that  if  I  was  put 
upon  the  stand,  I  would  have  to  tell  the 
truth  as  any  other  man  would. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  long  this  conversa 
tion  was  before  you  were  put  upon  the 
stand? 


A.  It  could  not  have  been  long  before, 
because  the  Court  was  waiting  when  I 
came  in. 

Q.  Was  it  in  this  room  or  out  of  it? 

A.  If  it  had  been  in  this  room,  I  would 
not  have  come  in  and  found  the  Court 
waiting.  I  had  endeavored  to  obtain  an 
interview  with  General  Hovey,  and  wrote 
to  him  requesting  one,  but  received  no  an 
swer. 

Q.  Why  did  you  seek  an  interview? 

A.  Because  I  wanted  to  get  out  of  the 
scrape. 

Q.  How  did  you  propose  to  get  out  of  the 
scrape? 

A.  I  made  no  proposition. 

Q.  Did  you  tell  them  you  would  reveal 
what  you  knew  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  told  them  I  would  have  to 
testify  as  any  other  man  would  who  was 
sworn. 

Q.  Did  you  not  know  that  they  could  not 
make  you  a  witness  without  discharging 
you? 

[Objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  and 
withdrawn.] 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate: 

Please  state  whether  you  ever  had  from 
any  Government  official  any  pledge  of 
promise,  if  you  would  come  upon  the  stand 
as  a  witness  ? 

A.  I  did  not ;  I  had  not  received  or  ex 
pected  any  pledge. 

Q.  Did  I  ever  hint  to  you  that  you  were 
to  be  a  witness  ? 

A.  You  did  not,  sir;  and  I  asked  Colonel 
Dunham,  just  before  1  was  called  on  the 
stand,  to  ask  the  Judge  Advocate  if  I 
should  have  my  witnesses  subpenaed  or 
not.  The  next  thing  I  was  on  the  stand. 

Q.  Your  interview  with  me  was  without 
any  pledge  or  promise,  and  by  your  own  in 
clination,  was  it  not? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

The  witness  here  requested  the  privilege 
of  making  a  correction  in  his  previous  tes 
timony,  in  regard  to  Mr.  Kerr's  taking 
three  degrees.  The  first  night  I  organized 
the  Council  at  New  Albany,  Indiana,  they 
all  took  three  degrees,  for  it  could  not  be 
organized  unless  they  had  taken  the  three 
degrees.  Mr.  Kerr  was  not  there  the  first 
night,  and  I  think  he  took  only  the  first 
degree  the  second  night, 

Q.  Do  you  mean  the  first  degree  proper? 

Yes,  sir. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Saturday  morning,  November  12,  1864. 
at  9  o'clock,  A.  M. 

COUBT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,        1 
November  12,  1804,  9  o'clock,  A.  M.  j 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

All    the    members    present.      Also,   the 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


141 


Judge    Advocate,  the   accused,   and   their 
counsel. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  ap 
proved. 

JAMES  L.  MASON,  a  witness  for  the  Govern 
ment,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly 
sworn,  testified  as  follows: 

I  have  resided  in  Greenfield,  Hancock 
county,  Indiana,  for  the  past  eight  years. 
I  am  Senator  from  that  district.  I  do  not 
know  that  I  have  ever  joined  any  secret 
society  except  the  Freemasons.  I  never 
took  the  obligation  of  either  the  Order  of 
Sons  of  Liberty,  or  the  American  Knights; 
and  I  never  read  the  obligations  of  these 
orders  until  I  saw  them  in  the  newspapers. 
A  gentleman,  a  Mr.  Hall,  who  reported 
himself  as  from  Rush  county,  came  to  my 
office  in  1862,  and  told  me  about  a  secret 
order,  and  read  a  ritual  to  me,  but  I  did 
not  consider  that  I  took  it,  and  I  really  do 
not  remember  what  was  the  name  of  the 
order  about  which  he  spoke;  it  certainly 
was  not  the  American  Knights,  or  Sons  of 
Liberty,  but  it  might  have  been  the  Circle 
of  Honor.  I  do  not  know  the  purpose  of 
his  visit  to  our  place,  nor  do  I  remember 
that  he  said  it  was  for  the  purpose  of  estab 
lishing  a  lodge.  I  never  saw  that  gentle 
man  before  or  after.  He  stated  what  the 
order  was,  and  certain  facts  about  it,  but  I 
do  not  think  he  stated  the  obligation,  nor 
do  I  remember  repeating  any  thing  after 
him.  My  present  recollection  is,  that  I  did 
not;  nor  did  he  authorize  me  to  form 
lodges,  that  I  remember.  Our  interview 
did  not  last  more  than  fifteen  or  twenty 
minutes.  I  believe  he  came  with  a  letter 
of  introduction  from  his  brother.  I  do  not 
remember  that  he  had  any  further  business 
with  me  than  talking  about  this  order. 
Possibly  his  object  might  have  been  to  in 
duce  me  to  form  a  lodge.  I  did  not  take 
any  steps  to  establish  the  order;  nor  did  I 
assist  in  organizing  any  lodge  in  the  State. 

HARRISON  CONNELL,  a  witness  for  the 
Government,  was  then  introduced,  and, 
being  duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate, 
testified  as  follows: 

I  reside  in  Martin  county,  Indiana.  I 
joined  a  secret  society  in  our  county,  about 
two  years  ago.  I  believe  it  was  called  the 
"  American  Knights."  I  joined  at  the  so 
licitation  of  Stephen  Horsey.  We  met  in 
the  evening  at  a  school-house  in  Columbia 
township.  Mr.  Horsey  lives  in  the  adjoin 
ing  township.  I  do  not  remember  how 
many  meetings  I  attended;  I  never  drilled 
with  the  order.  Some  ammunition  was 
brought  to  that  neighborhood;  by  whom  I 
do  not  know,  nor  do  I  know  for  what  pur 
pose.  Stephen  Horsey,  the  accused,  told  me 
to  meet  him  about  a  mile  and  a  half  from 
the  Shoals,  on  a  certain  evening,  and  we 
went  some  distance  down  the  railroad, 
where  we  found  some  ammunition  lying 
near  the  road.  We  put  it  in  a  sack,  and 


carried  it  home.  There  was  a  keg  of  powder, 
a  package  of  lead  and  a  package  of  caps.  1" 
do  not  know  where  the  ammunition  was 
concealed;  it  was  Mr.  Horsey  who  took  me 
to  it.  When  I  started,  he  did  not  tell  me 
where  he  wanted  me  to  go  with  him.  He 
wished  me  to  take  care  of  the  ammunition, 
and  I  put  it  in  my  barn,  in  the  granary, 
and  it  was  covered  over  with  thrashed  oats, 
When  I  was  arrested,  I  gave  it  up  to  the 
Detectives.  I  do  not  know  where  the  money 
came  from  with  which  the  ammunition 
was  purchased.  It  was  in  August,  or  the 
latter  part  of  July,  1864,  that  I  went  with 
Horsey  to  fetch  the  ammunition, 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  should  have  stated  that  William  Clay 
ton  initiated  me.  I  attended  a  meeting  of 
the  order  last  winter  at  the  Gaddis  House, 
at  which  a  Mr.  Stone  spoke,  and  the  man 
who  spoke  led  us  to  think  that  we  were 
sworn  into  the  service  of  Jeff  Davis.  I  re 
member  the  men  were  very  much  dissatis 
fied  with  his  speech. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
i  Monday  the  14th,  at  2  o'clock,  P.  M. 


Counr  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,        1 
November  14,  1864,  2  o'clock,  P.  M.  ) 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

All  the  members  present.  Also,  the 
Judge  Advocate,  and  the  accused,  (except 
W.  A.  Bowles,)  and  their  counsel. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

The  following  communication  from  W. 
A.  Bowles,  one  of  the  accused,  was  then  read 
to  the  Commission,  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate: 

To  the  President  and  Members  of  the  Commission : 
My  health  being  such  that  I  can  not 
attend  the  sittings  of  your  body,  I  hereby 
waive  my  right  to  attend  the  same,  and 
authorize  you  to  proceed  in  my  absence 
with  my  trial,  as  if  I  were  present. 

[Signed]  W.  A.  BOWLES. 

November  14,  1864. 

A  member  of  the  Commission  objected  to 
proceeding  with  the  trial  during  the  absence 
of  one  of  the  accused. 

The  Court  was  then  cleared  for  delibera 
tion. 

On  being  re-opened,  the  Judge  Advocate 
announced  that  the  objection  was  over 
ruled. 

ELISHA  COWGILL,  a  witness  for  the  Govern 
ment,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly 
sworn,  testified  as  follows: 

I  reside  at  Greencastle,  Putnam  county, 
Indiana.  In  1863,  I  was  Provost  Marshal 
in  the  Seventh  District.  While  in  the  per 
formance  of  my  duties  there,  I  was  brought 
in  contact  with  Mr.  Andrew  Humphreys. 
It  was  about  the  4th  of  June,  1863,  when  1 
saw  Mr.  Humphreys  at  the  head  of  about 


142 


TREASON  TRIALS   AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


.four  hundred  men.  When  I  first  came  up, 
Mr.  Humphreys  was  speaking  to  the  crowd. 
When  I  rode  up  toward  him,  he  came  to 
ward  me,  and  was  introduced  to  me  by 
Edward  Price,  of  Sullivan  county. 

1^  asked  a  number  of  persons  who  were 
there,  what  they  were  assembled  for,  and 
they  answered  to  protect  themselves.  All 
that  I  saw  were  armed,  except  perhaps  one 
or  two.  Mr.  Humphreys  had  command  of 
them.  They  did  not  profess  to  be  called 
out  as  militia,  by  the  United  States,  or  by 
the  State  authorities.  I  had  a  conversation 
with  Mr.  Humphreys  of  about  an  hour.  Mr. 
Humphreys  talked  a  great  deal  about  the 
President  of  the  United  States,  calling  him 
an  old  tyrant  before  the  crowd,  who  was 
usurping  a  great  deal  of  power,  and  wasting 
the  treasure  of  the  United  States,  and  the 
lives  of  the  citizens.  He  also  stated  that 
he  was  killing  off  about  forty  thousand  men 
per  day.  He  also  spoke  of  Vicksburg,  and 
asked  what  1  knew  about  it.  Threats  were 
made  against  me,  by  men  in  the  crowd,  and 
some  of  them  swore  they  would  kill  any 
man  who  attempted  to  enroll  Cass  town 
ship.  They  called  me  a  "  damned  abolition 
rascal,"  a  "Lincoln  pup,"  and  a  "Lincoln 
dog,"  that  deserved  to  be  killed.  Some  said 
they  ought  to  kill  me  before  I  got  out  of  the 
crowd.  They  wanted  me  to  tell  them  who 
the  enrolling  officer  of  that  township  would 
be.  I  told  them  he  would  be  known  to 
them  in  due  time.  His  name  was  Fletcher 
Freeman.  I  had  given  him  the  enrolling 
papers  the  night  before.  He  was  afterward 
shot  and  killed.  Mr.  Humphreys  made  a 
second  speech  to  the  people,  and  advised 
them  to  go  home  and  mind  their  own  busi 
ness;  he  asked  me  if  I  did  not  indorse  this; 
I  answered  that  I  did.  He  also  told  them, 
"Do  not  sleep  too  soundly."  I  then  went 
off,  and  a  man  named  Ursey  came  into  Sul 
livan  with  me.  I  regarded  Andy  Hum 
phreys  as  a  leader  of  the  rabble. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

This  took  place  about  the  4th  of  June, 
1863,  in  Sullivan  county,  and  I  understood 
it  was  in  Cass  township;  just  beyond  there 
is  a  little  town  called  Caledonia.  Mr.  Hum 
phreys  did  advise  the  crowd  to  go  home  and 
mind  their  own  business.  They  manifested 
no  violence  toward  me  except  in  their  talk, 
and  Mr.  Humphreys  remarked  that  there 
was  no  danger  unless  they  got  to  drinking. 
1  do  not  remember  that  Humphreys  said 
in  my  hearing,  that  the  people  had  got  ex 
cited  because  some  soldiers  had  shot  at  a 
man.  A  small  portion  of  the  crowd  were 
on  horseback.  1  thought  Mr.  Humphreys' 
remarks  were  intended  to  stop  them  from 
committing  any  violence  until  he  told  them 
"not  to  sleep  too  soundly."  When  he 
spoke  about  the  President  as  a  tyrant,  he 
was  standing  on  a  log,  and  the  crowd  were 
close  around  him.  He  dealt  in  about  such 


epithets  as  the  Democratic  speakers  used 
at  that  time.  Mr.  Humphreys  was  armed 
with  a  revolver.  I  did  not  say  that  I  could 
indorse  Mr.  Humpheys'  speech,  except  that 
part  where  he  advised  them  to  go  home. 
I  think  Mr.  Humphreys  asked  the  crowd 
to  hear  me;  it  was  when  Mr.  Price  intro 
duced  me  to  Mr.  Humphreys,  and  then 
he  (Humphreys)  told  the  crowd  that  I  was 
the  son  of  Judge  Cowgill,  and  that  he  was 
a  mighty  good  Democrat.  I  said  I  did  not 
want  any  credit  on  that  account,  as  I  dif 
fered  with  my  father  on  political  topics. 
I  may  have  tried  to  make  a  speech  to 
them,  for  I  asked  them  to  select  a  subject 
if  they  wanted  to  hear  me.  They  selected 
the  Conscription  Bill.  I  then  told  them 
that  the  first  thing  to  be  done  was  to  have 
an  enrollment.  They  all  swore  that  they 
would  not  have  one.  At  this  point  Mr. 
Humphreys  came  up  and  made  them  keep 
quiet. 

In  coming  out  from  Sullivan,  I  met  some 
soldiers  that  day.  They  were  marching  back 
toward  Sullivan.  There  was  probably  fifty 
or  sixty  of  them.  When  I  saw  them  they 
were  stopping,  and  were  not  marching  either 
way.  The  men  in  the  crowd  were  armed, 
some  with  squirrel  rifles,  some  with  shot 
guns,  and  others  with  pistols  and  bowie 
knives. 

The  meeting  was  in  the  woods,  near  the 
little  town  of  Caledonia.  The  country 
about  there  is  sparsely  settled.  I  do  not 
know  why  the  crowd  assembled  beyond  what 
they  stated,  that  they  were  there  to  pro 
tect  themselves,  and  vindicate  their  rights. 

Mr.  Ursey  came  to  Sullivan  and  tried  to 
get  me  drunk.  When  I  got  him  drunk, 
he  became  very  communicative,  and  told 
me  that  Mr.  Humphreys  commanded  the 
cavalry  and  he  the  infantry.  I  do  not  know 
that  the  crowd  did  any  violence  to  any 
body  that  day.  While  I  was  there,  Mr. 
Humphreys  was  evidently  trying  to  keep 
the  crowd  quiet,  and  he  succeeded  to  a  cer 
tain  extent.  I  left  before  they  dispersed, 
T  saw  Mr.  Humphreys'  revolver,  for  he 
happened  to  be  in  his  shirt  sleeves,  and 
was  sitting  down  by  a  tree  talking  to  me ; 
his  revolver  was  buckled  on  behind.  He 
did  not  say  why  he  wore  it,  but  remarked 
that  he  was  expecting  to  be  arrested. 

I  remarked  his  asking  me  about  the 
news  from  Vicksburg,  as  to  whether  the 
Government  troops  would  take  it ;  he  also 
asked  me  what  General  Grant's  daily  losses 
were.  I  said  I  could  not  tell.  He  then 
commenced  talking  about  himself,  and 
asked  me  whether  1  knew  of  any  arrange 
ments  being  made  to  have  him  arrested.  1 
said  I  did  not.  He  did  not  say  what  he 
expected  to  be  arrested  for;  but  I  think 
while  we  were  in  conversation,  he  remarked 
that  if  I  would  go  there  by  myself,  he 
would  take  care  of  me  over  night  at  his 
house,  and  would  go  over  the  next  morn- 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


143 


ing  to  Indianapolis  with  me,  as  he  did  not 
want  any  parade  about  it,  if  he  was  to  be 
arrested. 

There  were  no  flags  in  the  crowd  that  I 
saw,  and  each  man  wore  hie  own  citizen's 
suit. 

In  answer  to  interrogatories  put  by  the 
Commission,  the  witness  testified  as  follows 

I  do  not  know  that  the  enrolling  officer 
was  shot  and  killed  while  in  the  perform 
ance  of  his  duty.  My  knowledge  of  his 
death  came  from  Colonel  Thompson.  He 
had  two  townships  to  enroll,  and  was  killed 
while  working  on  the  road,  after  having 
nearly  completed  the  first  township.  I  got 
his  papers,  and  went  down  and  finished 
it  myself;  and  got  a  man  to  attend  to  the 
other. 

RE-CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  have  no  personal  knowledge  of  the 
manner  of  his  death;  I  speak  from  hear 
say.  His  death  occurred  about  ten  days 
after  the  meeting  referred  to. 

Dr.  JAMES  B.  WILSON,  a  witness  for  the 
(Government,  was  called  to  the  stand,  and, 
being  duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate, 
testified  as  follows : 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate: 

Please  state  your  name,  and  where  you 
reside. 

Answer.  James  B.  Wilson,  Salem,  Wash 
ington  county,  Indiana. 

Q.  What  is  your  profession,  or  business? 

A.  I  am  a  farmer  at  this  time. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  resided  in  Salem, 
Indiana? 

A    About  fourteen  years  next  February. 

Q.  State  whether  you  ever  joined  any 
secret  order  or  society  known  as  the  Amer 
ican  Knights,  or  Sons  of  Liberty. 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  joined  an  order  known  as 
the  American  Knights;  I  think  it  was  in 
September  or  October,  sometime  in  the  fall 
of  1863. 

Q.  Where? 

A.  At  Salem,  at  the  office  of  Colonel 
Heffren. 

Q.  By  whom  were  you  initiated  ? 

A.  By  Mr.  Bailey. 

Q.  Who  else  were  initiated  at  that  time? 

A.  I  do  not  think  I  can  give  the  names 
of  all,  but  I  can  of  some:  Mr.  Heffren,  Mr. 
Harris,  Mr.  McCoskey,  Mr.  Cutshaw,  Mr. 
Garris,  Mr.  Green,  Mr.  Fultz  and  Mr.  Beck. 

Q.  What  was  the  next  meeting  that  you 
attended  after  your  initiation? 

A.  A  meeting  at  this  place.-  It  was  said  to 
be  a  meeting  of  the  members  of  the  order 
in  the  State,  and  was  composed  of  delegates 
sent  from  the  different  county  temples. 

Q.   Who  presided  at  that  meeting? 

A.  Mr.  Dodd;  I  do  not  remember  who 
was  in  the  chair  at  first. 

Q.  About  what  time  in  the  day,  and  at 
what  date,  did  this  meeting  occur  ? 

A.  I  think  about  the  6th  of  November. 


Q.  Were  any  of  the  accused  present? 
A.  Dr.  Bowles  was  present. 

Q.  What  business  was  transacted  at  that 
meeting? 

A.  There  were  some  committees  ap 
pointed;  a  Military  Committee,  a  Commit 
tee  on  Education,  and  one  committee*  in 
reference  to  establishing  a  newspaper  to 
be  considered  the  organ  of  the  organiza 
tion. 

Q.  Who  composed  the  Military  Commit 
tee? 

A.  I  can  not  tell;  I  thought,  from  the  ac 
tions  of  Dr.  Bowles,  that  he  must  he  the 
Chairman  of  that  committee,  as  he  made  a 
verbal  report. 

Q.  Did  Mr.  Dodd  make  a  speech  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  what  that  speech 
was? 

A.  I  remember  something  of  it ;  he  spoke 
about  talking  treason  for  awhile;  it  was  to 
ward  the  close  of  the  meeting. 

Q.  State  about  how  he  said  that,  and  what 
he  was  talking  about  at  that  time. 

A.  I  can  not  give  his  language,  because  it 
is  so  long  ago,  and  I  did  not  refer  to  it  very 
often.  1  can  only  give  you  the  impression 
it  left  upon  my  mind.  He  said  that  he  would 
"kick  down  the  walls  of  common  decency," 
or  some  such  expression,  "  and  talk  treason 
for  awhile."  He  said,  "if  the  purposes  of 
this  organization  could  not  be  carried  out, 
as  explained  by  Mr.  Wright,  there  were  oth 
ers  that  could  be  resorted  to;  they  could 
very  easily,  if  their  organization  was  fully 
completed,  take  possession  of  the  railroads, 
cut  the  telegraph  wires,  and  throw  in  at  one 
time  troops  enough  at  the  capital  to  take 
the  State  Government  and  have  things  our 
own  way." 

Q.  About  what  time  in  the  day  did  he 
make  this  speech  ? 

A.  In  the  afternoon. 

Q.  Was  Mr.  Bowles  present  at  that  meet 
ing? 

A.  I  think  he  was. 

Q.  Was  Mr.  Humphreys  present  ? 

A.  I  did  not  know  Mr.  Humphreys  then. 

Q.  Do  you  know  if  Mr.  Bingham  wag 
present  at  that  time  ? 

A.  I  did  not  know  Mr.  Bingham  at  that 
time. 

Q.  What  else  was  said,  if  any  thing? 

A.  There  was  a  great  deal  said. 

Q.  Was  there  any  thing  done  or  said  in 
reference  to  any  member  who  might  have 
revealed  any  thing  in  regard  to  the  order? 

A.  Not  that  I  can  call  to  my  recollection. 
I  think  there  was  something  said  on  that 
subject,  but  I  can  not  now  recollect  it. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  attend  any  other  Grand 
Council  of  the  State  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  never  did. 

Q.  Did  you  not  attend  a  meeting  of  tho 
Council  at  Chicago,  or  of  a  committee? 

A,  I  did,  sir ;  I  understood  from  a  gen- 


144 


TREASON   TRIALS  AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


tleman  who  was  present  in  the  meeting, 
that  it  was  to  be  composed  of  the  military 
part  of  the  organization ;  and  he  had  called 
it  at  his  own  instance. 

Q.  From  whom  did  you  learn  this? 

A.  Mr.  Barrett  said  that  it  was  to  be  com 
posed  of  the  military  men  of  the  order. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  establish  any  lodges,  or 
take  any  active  part  in  the  propagation  of 
this  society  ? 

A.   Yes,  sir,  I  did. 

Q.  To  what  extent? 

A.  I  established  lodges  in  three  different 
townships  in  Washington  county. 

Q.  How  extensive  were  these  lodges  in 
the  townships  of  your  county? 

A.  There  were  lodges  in  all  townships  in 
jur  county  .except  two. 

Q.  Did  you  visit  all  these  lodges  ? 

A.  I  think  I  did. 

Q.  When  you  visited  these  lodges,  what 
did  you  go  for  ? 

A.  For  the  purpose  of  giving  them  the 
work  of  the  Neophyte  or  First  Degree. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  give  them  more  than  the 
Neophyte  degree,  or  the  First  or  Vestibule 
degree? 

A.  I  think  I  assisted  in  giving  the  second 
and  third  degrees  to  a  couple  of  gentle 
men. 

Q.  To  whom? 

A.  Captain  Hamilton  and  B.  F.  Nichol 
son,  of  Washington  county. 

Q.  Did  you  go  for  any  thing  else? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  for  the  purpose  of  giving 
them  instructions  in  the  object  of  the  order, 
and  give  them  information  that  I  thought 
was  reliable. 

Q.  What  information  did  you  give  them 
at  any  time? 

A.  I  gave  them  information  about  the 
preparation  in  Illinois,  which  I  received 
from  a  gentleman  named  Wright,  from 
the  State,  and  formerly  from  Washington 
county. 

Q.  What  did  he  tell  you  ? 

A.  I  learned  from  Mr.  Wright  that  they 
were  ready  for  any  movement;  that  they 
had  arms  in  their  hands,  generally,  and 
were  ready  for  any  emergency  that  the 
order  might  contemplate,  or  wish  to  carry 
out. 

Q.  Did  he  report  to  you  how  extensively 
the  organization  was  armed  in  Illinois  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  he  said  they  were  generally 
prepared. 

Q.  What  were  the  preparations  in  Illi 
nois? 

A.  In  the  county  where  he  resided,  he 
said  almost  the  entire  Democratic  party. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  the  extent  of  the  order 
in  the  State? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  State  what  you  know  in  regard  to  the 
arming  and  drilling,  or  the  attempt  to  arm 
and  drill  in  your  county,  preceding  your  visit 
to  Chicago,  Illinois. 


A.  I  am  not  aware  of  any  special  efforts 
made  at  arming,  only  as  individual  mem 
bers  of  the  order  armed  themselves.  I 
know  of  a  great  many  members  of  the 
order  buying  pistols. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  attempts  to 
drill? 

A.  I  understood  that  Mr.  Hamilton  had 
a  company,  and  that  they  had  drilled. 

Q.  Now  please  tell  the  Court  about  your 
visit  to  Chicago;  and  how  you  came  to  go 
there? 

A.  I  think  I  went  there  mostly  at  my 
own  suggestion;  I  was  in  bad  health,  and 
thought  a  trip  up  there  might  be  of  service 
to  me,  and  suggested  that  if  no  one  de 
sired  to  go  there,  I  would  go  myself;  I 
spoke  to  Mr.  Heffren,  Mr.  Harris,*  and  a 
number  of  persons  about  it. 

Q.  Did  any  one  accompany  you  ? 

A.  Mr.  Green  did. 

Q.  Is  he  a  member  of  the  order? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  time  did  you  start  to  Chi 
cago? 

A.  I  think  about  the  19th  of  July.  1864,' 
and  arrived  on  the  morning  of  the  20th,  I 
think. 

Q.  Where  did  you  stop  in  Chicago? 

A.  At  the  Tremont  House. 

Q.  Whom  did  you  see  there  from  this 
State? 

A.  I  believe  only  Mr.  Dodd  and  Dr. 
Bowles. 

Q.  Give  an  account  of  where  you  went 
and  what  you  did  while  in  Chicago? 

A.  I  think  we  got  in  early  in  the  morn 
ing  of  the  20th;  and  after  taking  breakfast 
we  went  down  to  the  Richmond  House, 
where  Dr.  Bowles  said  he  stopped,  and  in 
quired  for  his  room ;  we  were  shown  to  it 
by  a  servant  of  the  house,  but  he  happened 
to  be  in  an  adjoining  room.  There  seemed 
to  be  a  promiscuous  conversation  going  on; 
they  talked  about  politics  a  little  and  on 
sundry  matters.  After  having  listened  for 
some  time,  I  think  I  asked  if  there  was 
not  going  to  be  a  meeting.  Dr.  Bowles  re 
marked  to  me  that  there  would  be  a  meet 
ing,  but  they  were  not  ready  for  it,  as  the 
persons  they  expected  had  not  arrived. 

Q.  Who  were  those  persons? 

A.  Mr.  Dodd,  for  one. 

Q.  Where  did  he  say  Dodd  was? 

A.  He  said  that  he  was  gone  to  Niagara 
Falls,  or  had  started  to  go  there;  but  expect 
ed  to  get  back  in  time  for  the  meeting.  Af 
ter  remaining  some  time,  we  found  there  was 
not  to  be  a  meeting  until  the  next  day. 
The  next  morning  we  went  back  to  Dr. 
Bowies'  room,  and  learned  that  Judge  Bui- 
litt  and  Mr.  Williams  had  arrived.  When 
we  had  remained  a  little  while  in  Dr. 
Bowies'  room,  these  gentlemen  came  in, 
and  I  am  not  sure  but  we  went  into  another 
room. 

Q,  Who  was  there? 


TREASON  TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


145 


A.  Judge  Bullitt,  Mr.  Piper,  Mr.  Wil 
liams,  and  Mr.  Barrett,  I  remember. 

Q.  What  was  said  there? 

A.  The  conversation  was  again  of  a  pro 
miscuous  character.  After  sitting  a  while, 
some  one  suggested  that  perhaps  we  had 
better  hear  why  Mr.  Barrett  had  called 
•*he  meeting.  He  said  that  he  had  called 
ffor  a  military  meeting,  to  be  composed,  as 
he  had  expected,  of  the  military  men  of 
*'  his  organization,  and  that  he  had  used  his 
*oest  efforts  to  get  men  of  that  character 
to  the  meeting,  but  that  he  believed  he  had 
failed.  He  did  not  name  whom  he  ex 
pected. 

He  then  stated  that  his  object  in  calling 
the  meeting  was,  that  he  thought  theGovern- 
ment  could  be  restored,  and  he  was  satis 
fied  it  could  be  if  we  could  get  the  co-ope 
ration  of  the  North  with  the  South,  or  a 
portion  of  the  North,  Ohio,  Indiana,  Illi 
nois,  Missouri  and  Kentucky;  he  said  if 
the  members  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty  in  the 
States  would  co-operate  with  the  South, 
he  had  no  doubt  the  entire  Government 
would  be  saved  through  their  action.  He 
also  said  that  it  had  been  contemplated  to 
have  an  uprising  at  some  time  soon,  per 
haps  as  early  as  the  third  of  August,  but 
that  had  failed  from  some  cause;  and  he 
thought  every  thing  could  be  got  ready  for 
an  uprising,  perhaps,  by  the  10th  or  15th  of 
the  month,  and  that  the  South,  in  order  to 
show  her  willingness  to  engage  in  some 
movement  that  would  restore  the  Govern 
ment,  had  authorized  him  to  place  at  the 
disposal  of  members  of  the 'organization,  a 
large  sum  of  money,  amounting  to  two 
millions  of  dollars. 

Q.  Did  he  say  where  the  money  came 
from  ? 

A.  lie  said  that  it  had  been  captured 
from  a  United  States  Paymaster  on  Red 
river,  and  that  the  organization  could  have 
the  use  of  that  amount  of  money  in  pre 
paring  themselves  to  rise  against  the  Lin 
coln  administration;  that  it  would  be  dis 
tributed  to  the  several  Grand  Commanders 
of  those  States,  and  by  them  subdivided 
among  such  persons  inside  of  the  order  as 
in  their  judgment  was  prudent,  and  to  be 
expended  by  those  who  received  it  for  arms 
and  other  appliances  of  war.  And  he  fur 
ther  stated,  that  in  calling  this  meeting  it 
was  done  at  his  own  suggestion;  that  this 
money  was  to  be  used  for  the  benefit  of 
the  order,  and  that  as  he  did  not  wish  any 
of  the  delegates  there  to  be  at  any  expense, 
if  we  would  make  out  our  bills  of  expenses 
in  coming  and  while  there,  he  would  pay 
us;  and  he  did;  at  least  I  got  mine,  forty 
dollars. 

Q.  Where  did  he  get  this  money  from  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know;  but  I  think  he  said  it 
was  captured  from  a  paymaster  on  Red 
river. 

Q.  And  did  he  pay  all  their  expenses? 
10 


A.  I  understood  they  would  all  receive 
their  expenses  if  they  desired  it. 

Q.  What  else  was  Baid  at  that  meet 
ing? 

A.  That  was  about  the  amount  of  what 
was  said ;  I  do  not  recollect  that  any  one 
discussed  the  matter,  or  offered  any  partic 
ular  opinion  at  that  time. 

Q.  Was  any  thing  said  about  the  destruc 
tion  of  Government  property  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir:  but  not  at  that  meeting;  I 
think  it  was  on  the  afternoon  of  that  day 
or  the  next,  I  am  not  sure  which,  he  stated, 
in  speaking  of  the  money,  that  it  had  been 
used  for  the  purpose  of  paying  for  the  de 
struction  of  United  States  property,  ar 
senals,  burning  boats,  etc. 

Q.  Did  he  say  how  this  was  to  be   paid? 

A.  He  said  they  would  pay  ten  per  cent, 
on  property  so  destroyed,  and  were  willing 
to  make  an  estimate  upon  the  value  as 
sessed  by  Government  officers,  that  would 
generally  be  announced  through  the  North 
ern  newspapers;  that  they  would  take  the 
Government  estimate  as  a  basis  for  calcula 
tion. 

Q.  Did  he  give  any  instance  where  Gov 
ernment  property  had  been  destroyed? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  the  burning  of  some  Gov 
ernment  stores  in  Louisville,  on  Eighth 
street,  I  believe;  also  the  destruction  of 
some  Government  boats  on  the  Ohio  river, 
and  one,  I  believe,  at  St.  Louis. 

Q.  And  those  persons  were  to  receive  ten 
per  cent.,  you  say? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  he  say  what  means  were  used  to 
destroy  this  property  ? 

A.  I  afterward  learned  from  Dr.  Bowles 
that  the  means  employed  was  Greek  fire. 

Q.  What  else  took  place  at  that  meeting 
in  Chicago? 

A.  There  was  an  explanation  made,  I 
afterward  learned  from  Dr.  Bowles  more 
particularly,  in  regard  to  a  flag ;  that  the 
members  of  the  organization  should  be 
careful  to  have  instructions  sent  to  their 
friends  that  in  case  of  an  invasion  by  the 
guerrillas,  the  members  should  make  use 
of  a  flag,  made  of  white  cloth,  with  a  red 
ribbon  running  along  the  top  and  carried 
down  the  sides  and  hanging  below,  like 
streamers;  this  was  to  be  tied  to  a  stick. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Tuesday,  November  15,  1864,  at  9 
o'clock,  A.  M. 


COUET  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         ) 
November  15, 1864, 9  o'clock,  A.  M.  f 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  ad 
journment. 

All  the  members  present.  Also,  the 
Judge  Advocate,  the  accused,  (except  W. 
A.  Bowles,)  and  their  counsel. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

The  examination  of  Janus  B.  Wilson,  a 


146 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


A.  I  do  not  think  I  heard  that  matter 
definitely  spoken  of,  except  with  regard  to 
our  State,  Indiana;  I  understood  Dodd  was 
to  be  the  leader  in  Indiana. 

Q.  Did  you  hear  who  was  to  take  care  of 
Ohio? 

A.  I  understood  from  some  source  that 
Ohio  was  to  be  taken  care  of  by  Vallandig 
ham. 

Q.  In  what  event? 

A.  In  the  event  of  a  general  uprising. 
He  had  some  forces  athis  disposal  in  Canada, 
and  would  bring  those  forces  into  Ohio  to 
co-operate  with  other  forces  at  Cincinnati 
and  Louisville. 

Q.  From  whom  did  you  learn  this  ? 

A.  I  can  not  be  positive;  my  impression 
is  that  I  learned  it  from  Dr.  Bowles. 

A.  The  Southern  Confederacy  generally.       Q.  At  this  meeting  in  Chicago  you  say,  do 
Q.  Did  you  learn  \vho  were  the  parties  you  not,  that  the  expenses  of  the  delegates 
that  were  expected  there,  but  did  not  come? !  were  paid  by  Barrett  out  of  the  two  million 
A.  I  do  not  think  I  did.     I  think  that!  dollars  that  he  had  received  from  the  South- 


witness  for  the  Government,  was  then  re 
sumed  as  follows: 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate: 

Did  you  meet  any  persons  who  purported 
to  represent  the  Southern  Confederacy  at 
the  Chicago  meeting,  or  convention,  to  which 
you  have  referred? 

Answer.  Yes,  sir.  A  man  calling  himself 
by  the  name  of  Majors;  and  Mr.  Ban-ret, 
also,  stated  that  he  was  authorized  to  repre 
ss  nt  the  Southern  Confederacy. 

Q.  You  say  that  Mr.  Barrett  represented 
himself  as  a  representative  of  the  Southern 
Confederacy  at  that  meeting? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  any  of  those  gentlemen  profess  to 


represent  any  special  States,  or  only 
Southern  Confederacy  generally  ? 


the 


Mr.  Amos  Green,  of  Illinois,  was  mentioned 
as  being  expected,  and  it  was  also  expected 
that  Mr.  Vallandigham  would  be  there,  but 
they  had  learned  prior  to  the  meeting  that 
he  would  not  be  there,  and  had  sent  a 
messenger  to  him. 

Q.  Who  was  that  messenger? 

A.  I  think  it  was  Mr.  Green,  or  Mr.  Hol- 
loway,  or  perhaps  both. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  whether  they  saw  Mr. 
Vallandigham  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  I  did. 

Q.  Did  you  hear  Mr.  Dodd,  or  Mr.  Hol- 
loway,  or  any  other  person  say  in  reference 
to  this  meeting,  that  they  had  had  any  con 
versation  with  Mr.  Vallandigham? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Where    did   Mr.    Dodd    come    from? 


where 
been  ? 


did  he  represent  himself  to  have 


A.  At  the  Clifton  House,  near  Niagara 
Falls. 

Q.  For  what  purpose? 

A.  To  meet  with  the  commissioners,  or 
delegates,  that  were  duly  authorized  by 
the  Southern  Confederacy  to  meet  at  that 
meeting. 

.Q.  Who  were  they? 

A.  Holcomb,  Clay,  Saunders,  and  another, 
whom  I  supposed  was  this  Majors,  Captain 
Majors,  as  he  was  called.  The  way  I  re 
member  this  is,  that  something  was  said 
about  a  safe  conveyance  being  asked  for  by 
Mr.  Holcomb  in  his  address  to  Mr.  Greeley 
for  himself,  Mr.  Clay,  Mr.  Saunders,  and 
another ;  this  other  man,  I  understood,  was 
Captain  Majors. 

Q.  Is  this  Captain  Majors  the  one  you 
spoke  of  as  being  at  Chicago? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  of  any  part  that  was  to 
be  taken  by  the  different  leading  men  in 
this  contemplated  uprising?  If  so,  what? 
Who,  for  instance,  was  to  lead  in  this  State, 
who  in  Ohio,  and  who  in  Illinois  ? 


ern  Confederacy  ? 

A.  1  understood  it  was  so. 

Q.  He  paid  your  expenses,  do  you  say? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  receipted  him  for  mine 
and  Mr.  Green's,  which  I  forgot  to  mention 
yesterday. 

Q.  Was  that  money  to  be  returned  or  re 
paid  in  any  way? 

A.  No,  sir;  not  that  I  understood. 

Q.  On  what  day  did  you  start  back  from 
Chicago? 

A.  I  can  not  be  positive  as  to  the  day: 
but  I  think  we  were  there  two  days. 

Q.  Have  you  named  to  the  Court  all  the 
persons  that  were  at  that  meeting  when 
Barrett  made  that  proposition  ? 

A.  I  can  not  say,  but  I  will  state  now  those 
that  I  can  remember:  Mr.  Barrett,  Dr. 
Bowles,  Mr.  Williams  and  Judge  Bullitt, 
both  from  Kentucky;  and  Mr.  Piper  was 
there. 

Q.  Where  was  he  from  ? 

A.  I  can  not  say. 

Q.  Did  he  profess  to  hold  any  position  in 
the  order? 

A.  I  understood  from  Dr.  Bowles  that  he 
was  a  kind  of  general  missionary. 

Q.  What  does  that  mean? 

A.  A  man  that  was  going  about  diffusing 
a  knowledge  of  the  order. 

Q.  And  carrying  light  into  dark  places  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Who  else  was  there? 

A.  Mr.  Majors,  Mr.  Swem. 

Q.  Who  is  Mr.  Swem? 

A.  A  citizen  of  Chicago.  Mr.  Walsh,  also 
j  a  citizen  of  Chicago,  was  present,  and  Mr. 
Holloway,  Mr.  Dodd,  Mr.  Green  and  my 


self. 
Q. 


You  say  that  Mr.  Barrett  announced 


this  as  a  meeting  of  the  military  heads  of 
the  order;  will  you  state  how  you  happened 
to  be  present? 

A.  1  knew  nothing  of  the  character  of  the 
meeting,  but  Dr.  Bowles  afterward  told  me 


TREASON   TRIALS  AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


147 


that  he  had  reported  me  as  one  of  his  staff 
officers,  and  also  Mr.  Green. 

Q.  In  what  capacity? 

A.  Tie  did  not  state. 

Q.  Then  he  reported  you  simply  on  his 
staff,  and  you  gained  access  in  that  way  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Was  Dodd  considered  the  military 
head  of  the  order? 

A.  He  was  to  be  so  considered  in  this 
State,  I  understood. 

Q.  What  position  did  Bullitt  and  Barrett 
hold,  militarily? 

A.  I  did  not  learn. 

Q.  You  did  not  learn  the  position  of  any 
of  these  men  then,  except  that  they  were 
military  chiefs? 

A.  I  did  not. 

Q.  You  started  back,  did  you.  about  July 
23d,  1864  ? 

A.  I  think  I  did. 

Q.  Was  any  thing  resolved  upon  at  that 
meeting? 

A.  Not  that  I  know  of;  the  discussion  was 
not  of  a  definite  character  in  my  presence. 

Q.  Did  they  hold  any  meetings  when  you 
were  not  present  ? 

A.  I  suspect  they  did. 
•  Q.  What  made  you  suspect  that? 

A.  Because  I  saw  other  men  that  I  did 
not  know,  and  to  whom  I  was  not  intro 
duced,  in  another  room,  having  close  con 
versation. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  if  Vallandigham  was 
expected? 

A.  Judge  Bullitt  said  so. 

Q.  Did  you  understand  that  any  one  had 
come  from  Canada  ? 

A.  I  understood  that  Mr.  Green  and.  Mr. 
Holloway  had  been  to  see  Vallandigham, 
and  that  Mr.  Dodd  had  been  to  Canada  to 
see  the  Commissioners. 

Q.  Who  came  back  with  you? 

A.  Mr.  Green,  my  lady  and  Dr.  Bowles 
were  on  the  same  train. 

Q.  Did  you  have  any  conversation  with 
Dr.  Bowles  after  you  returned? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  of  any  thing  that  was 
to  be  done,  or  contemplated  to  be  done  ? 

A.  I  understood  that  Mr.  Dodd  had 
abandoned  the  project,  and  that  he  had 
sent  his  son  to  say  that  he  would  drop  it. 

Q.  At  what  time  did  you  learn  that? 

A.  My  best  recollection  is,  that  it  was 
about  two  weeks  after  my  return,  near  the 
7th  of  August. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  why  the  project  had 
been  abandoned? 

A.  Not  definitely. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  any  communi 
cation  was  attempted  to  be  had,  or  was  had, 
with  any  rebel  forces,  commissioners,  or 
messengers  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  I  do  not;  I  heard  it  spoken  of. 

Q.  By  whom? 

A.  It  was  spoken  of  at  the  Chicago  meet 


ing;  I  think  Dr.  Bowles  said  messengers 
were  sent  to  the  rebels. 

Q.  Where  were  they  sent  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know,  sir ;  I  think  they  were 
sent  into  Kentucky  and  Missouri. 

Q.  Do  you  know  with  whom  communica 
tion  was  attempted  to  be  made  ? 

A.  I  inferred  it  was  to  be  with  Price 
and  Buckner,  because  they  were  to  be 
the  co-operating  forces  in  case  of  an  upris 
ing. 

Q.  Will  you  give  to  this  Court,  to  the  best 
of  your  knowledge,  how  this  uprising  was 
to  take  place,  where  the  rendezvous  was  to 
be,  and  under  what  circumstances? 

A.  It  was  to  take  place  by  the  order  of 
Mr.  Dodd;  he  was  to  send  out  couriers  to 
the  different  commanders  of  the  several 
districts  of  the  State,  the  major  generals  of 
the  four  districts  into  which  the  State  was 
divided ;  and  they  were  to  send  out  cour 
iers  into  the  respective  counties  composing 
their  several  districts,  who  were  to  give 
notice  of  the  uprising  in  their  counties,  and 
then  it  was  expected  that  that  information 
would  be  conveyed  to  certain  persons  in 
each  county  that  had  been  prominent  and 
leading  men  of  the  organization,  who  were 
to  see  that  it  was  conveyed  to  the  different 
townships  in  the  county.  The  general  sig 
nal  for  the  uprising  was  to  be  the  appear 
ance  of  guerrillas  or  troops  in  the  vicinity 
of  St.  Louis  and  Louisville.  It  might  have 
been  on  the  16th  August,  or  a  few  days 
later;  or,  if  these  couriers  got  through  in 
time,  and  the  Southern  forces  were  to  get 
the  information,  they  might  appear  sooner 
than  the  16th. 

Q.  To  whom  were  the  couriers  to  go  ? 

A.  To  Generals  Buckner  and  Price. 

Q.  Were  these  couriers  to  return,  and 
then  the  uprising  to  take  place  ? 

A.  There  was  nothing  said  about  their 
returning;  the  appearance  of  the  troops 
was  to  be  the  signal. 

Q.  Where  were  the  troops  to  rendezvous? 

A.  The  forces  of  Southern  Indiana  were 
to  be  rendezvoused  at  a  place  some  eight  or 
ten  miles  from  New  Albany. 

Q.   Under  whom  ? 

A.  It  was  expected  they  would  be  under 
Dr.  Bowles. 

Q.  Where  were  the  forces  in  this  part  of 
the  State  to  rendezvous  ? 

A.  I  did  not  learn  that. 

Q.  And  the  forces  in  Illinois  ? 

A.  At  several  points;  in  the  neighborhood 
of  Rock  Island,  Springfield,  Chicago,  and 
some  other  points,  perhaps. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  who  was  to  be  the 
leader  in  that  State? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  where  the  rendezvous 
was  to  take  place  in  Missouri? 

A.  I  understood  that  after  they  had  com 
pleted  the  seizure  of  the  arsenals  in  Illi 
nois,  they  were  to  march  to  St.  Louis,  to  co- 


148 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


operate  with  Price's  forces  in  the  taking  of 
that  place. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  what  they  were  to  do 
after  the  rendezvousing  at  the  different 
points  in  this  State?  , 

A.  There  was  nothing  said  about  it  in 
Chicago,  but  I  learned  that  what  was  to  be 
done  in  Indiana,  was  to  be  under  the  su 
pervision  of  Mr.  Dodd. 

Q.  What  was  that? 

A.  I  did  not  understand  what  persons 
were  to  lead  them  in  particular,  but  they 
were  to  be  concentrated  at  Indianapolis, 
and  perhaps  at  Terre  Haute,  New  Albany, 
and  Jeffersonville;  perhaps  Evansville  was 
named,  I  am  not  positive.  The  capture  of 
the  State  Capitol  at  Indianapolis  was  left, 
as  I  understood,  to  the  special  supervision 
of  Mr.  Dodd,  and  he  was  to  do  it  by  getting 
up  public  meetings.  There  was  to  be  an 
ordinary  political  meeting  called  at  Indian 
apolis,  as  well  as  I  could  understand,  east 
of  the  city,  at  some  place  of  resort  for  Sab 
bath  school  picnics,  where  water  was  con 
venient;  as  I  understood,  at  some  fashion 
able  place  for  public  meetings.  I  do  not 
know  whether  there  is  such  a  place  or  not. 
It  seemed,  as  well  as  I  could  learn,  that 
there  were  three  places  in  an  easterly  di 
rection,  perhaps  from  Camp  Morton;  I  may 
have  misunderstood  it,  but  I  give  my  best 
recollections  of  it.  The  three  points  were 
east  of  Camp  Morton.  One  meeting  would, 
perhaps,  be  a  Sabbath  school  meeting ;  an 
other  a  political  meeting;  and  the  third, 
perhaps,  a  political  meeting — or  something 
of  that  kind;  those  of  the  order  who  as 
sisted  at  the  meeting,  and  those  who  were 
members  of  the  organization,  would  come 
to  these  meetings  in  wagons,  bringing  their 
families;  as  a  general  thing,  they  would 
have  arms,  secreted  in  the  wagons  under 
straw  or  hay.  After  arriving  at  the  differ 
ent  points,  some  one  would  propose,  to  be 
in  the  fashion,  that  they  drill,  and  they 
were  to  come  out  and  drill. 
"*'  Q.  Were  they  to  drill  with  or  without 
arms? 

A.  Without  arms.  The  object  of  the  drill 
was,  that  each  individual  who  was  to  take 
part  in  the  affairs  of  the  day,  would  under 
stand  where  his  place  was,  what  was  his 
duty,  and  what  was  expected  of  him.  At 
the  time  of  day  when  the  soldiers  came  on 
dress  parade,  at  some  place  east  of  the 
camp  ground,  some  one  at  the  camp  would 
throw  up  a  signal,  which  would  be  seen 
from  these  meeting  places;  when  the  signal 
was  seen,  those  who  understood  what  they 
had  met  there  for,  would  at  once  seize  their 
arms  and  march  immediately  in  the  direc 
tion  of  Camp  Morton.  At  the  time  they 
were  thus  marching,  the  fences  and  build 
ings  of  Camp  Morton  were  to  be  fired.  It 
was  understood  that  the  released  rebel  pris 
oners  would  participate  in  the  affair,  and 
that  these  rebel  soldiers  could  come  up  in 


the  rear,  and  that  the  Federal  soldiers,  find 
ing  themselves  surrounded,  would  be  easily 
overcome.  The  rebel  prisoners  would  be 
armed  with  the  soldiers'  arms,  and  the  sol 
diers  would  be  held  as  prisoners  of  war. 
At  the  time  this  was  going  on — the  work 
of  freeing  prisoners  and  the  capturing  these 
soldiers — a  detail  of  persons  was  to  be  sent 
to  take  care  of  the  Governor,  and  secure 
him;  in  some  way  take  care  of  him;  and 
then  the  arsenals  at  this  place  were  to  be 
seized,  and  a  better  quality  of  arms  pro 
cured;  those  that  went  on  with  this  expedi 
tion  were  to  be  as  fully  armed  from  the  arse 
nal  as  was  necessary.  They  were  also  to 
take  such  munitions  of  war  as  they  thought 
proper  with  them.  They  were  then  to  seize 
the  railroad  to  Jeffersonville,  and  make  use 
of  the  cars  for  the  transportation  of  troops 
and  the  rebel  prisoners;  they  were  then  to 
go  on  and  complete  the  same  work  at  Jef 
fersonville  and  New  Albany,  and  also  to  co 
operate  in  the  capture  of  Louisville. 

Q.  That  was  the  general  scheme,  was 
it? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  a  great  deal  of  the  minutia  I 
may  have  forgotten;  that  is  my  general 
impression. 

Q.  How  extensively  was  this  plan  made 
known  to  the  members  of  the  order? 

A.  It  was  made  known  to  all  the  mem 
bers  of  the  order  in  my  county. 

Q.  Can  you  state  how  extensively  in  any 
other  county? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  What  county  do  you  reside  in? 

A.  In  Washington  county? 

Q.  Does  Mr.  Kerr  live  in  your  county? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  What  prominent  men  was  that  scheme 
made  known  to  in  your  county? 

A.  To  all  the  members  of  the  organiza 
tion. 

Q.  How  many  does  the  order  number 
in  your  county  ? 

A.  I  can  not  say ;  I  think  above  a  thou 
sand  men. 

Q.  Was  Mr.  Heffren  present  at  the  No 
vember  meeting  of  the  Grand  Council  in 
Indianapolis,  that  you  referred  to  yester 
day  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Was  Mr.  Milligan? 

A.  I  did  not  know  him  at  that  time. 

Q.  Was  Dr.  Bowles  present  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  yt>u  know  Dr.  Athon  and  Mr.  Ris- 
tine,  of  this  city? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  know  Dr.  Athon. 

Q.  Was  either  present  at  that  meeting  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  they  were,  sir. 

Q.  Were  you  ever  furnished  any  money 
for  the  purchase  of  arms  for  this  order? 
[f  so,  by  whom,  and  what  amount? 

A.  I  was  furnished  with  a  thousand  dol- 
iars  by  Dr.  Bowles,  for  the  purchase  of 
arms  for  those  of  the  order  who  were  un 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


149 


derstood  to  be  unable  to  procure  arms 
themselves. 

Q.  Were  they  to  be  distributed  to  any 
particular  class,  or  only  to  members  of  the 
order? 

A.  It  was  understood  that  they  were  to 
be  distributed  to  those  who  were  unable  to 
arm  themselves. 

Q.  Did  you  make  any  attempt  to  pur 
chase  any  arms  with  that  thousand  dol 
lars? 

A.  I  went  to  see  Mr.  Kent,  at  New  Al 
bany,  about  the  purchase  of  the  arms. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  with  this  money  ? 

A.  I  gave  it  out  to  men  to  furnish  sub 
stitutes  with. 

Q.  You  loaned  it,  did  you  not? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  took  no  note  of  it;  it  was 
only  an  accommodation  loan  to  personal 
friends,  to  men  whom  I  could  trust,  and 
from  whom  I  could  get  it  any  time  I 
needed. 

Q.  Then  this  money  was  diverted  from 
the  channel  for  which  it  was  originally  in 
tended,  was  it  not? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

Dr.  Bowles  told  me  that  he  obtained  my 
admission  to  the  meeting  at  Chicag'o,  by 
representing  me  as  a  member  of  his  staff; 
that  is  not  true,  however;  I  hold  no  posi 
tion  in  the  order.  I  did  not  see  Milligan, 
Humphreys  or  Horsey  at  the  Chicago  meet 
ing;  nor  did  I  get  any  information  of  the 
contemplated  uprising  from  either  of  the 
accused,  save  Dr.  Bowles.  I  never  spoke  to 
Mr.  Horsey  in  my  life ;  Mr.  Humphreys  I 
have  seen  but  once,  having  passed  the  com 
pliments  of  the  day  with  him  at  the  Chi 
cago  Convention;  with  Mr.  Milligan  I 
became  acquainted  at  the  State  Con 
vention  here  in  July.  From  what  I  saw 
during  the  Chicago  meeting,  I  was  led  to 
think  that  there  was  a  meeting  inside  of 
the  one  I  was  permitted  to  witness.  There 
were  many  schemes  proposed  for  carrying 
out  the  uprising,  the  release  of  prisoners, 
etc.,  but  the  one  I  have  given  in  my  direct 
testimony  was  that  which  was  deemed 
most  plausible,  and  most  likely  to  be 
adopted;  but  I  do  not  know  that  it  was 
resolved  upon. 

The  thousand  dollars  I  received  from  Dr. 
Bowles  for  the  purchase  of  arms,  he  gave 
me  to  understand,  was  from  his  private 
funds;  and  what  he  said  impressed  me 
with  that  idea. 

I  have  been  under  arrest;  but  no  induce 
ment  or  promise  of  favor  has  been  held  out 
to  me  by  the  authorities  to  induce  me  to 
testify  against  the  defendants  in  this  case ; 
neither  has  promise  of  immunity  from 
punishment  been  held  out  to  me,  as  an 
inducement  to  testify ;  nor  has  any  one 
visited  me  while  in  confinement  to  ascer 
tain  what  I  could  testify  to.  Not  until 


12  o'clock  yesterday,  did  I  know  that 'I 
should  be  required  as  a  witness ;  the  guard 
then  informed  me  that  I  was  required  in 
the  court  room. 

Q.  Did  you  tell  any  one  after  you  were 
arrested,  and  before  you  were  called  upon, 
what  your  testimony  would  be? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Ad 
vocate,  and  withdrawn. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

It  was  distinctly  stated  to  me  before  tes 
tifying,  that  the  Government  authorities 
would  make  me  no  pledges,  nor  did  any 
Government  official  make  any  threats  to 
me.  The  only  position  I  held  in  the  order 
was  that  of  Ancient  Brother  in  our  County 
Temple.  Dr.  Bowles  told  me  that  he 
would  appoint  me  to  the  position  of 
Adjutant  General  on  his  staff,  if  I  desired 
it;  but  I  told  him  I  did  not  wish  it,  as 
I  had  no  knowledge  of  military  mat 
ters.  I  and  Mr.  Heffren  had  some  talk 
about  it.  The  organization,  which  I  after 
ward  understood  to  be  the  Sons  of  Liberty, 
was  in  session  in  Chicago  at  the  time  of 
the  Democratic  Convention,  when  General 
McClellan  was  nominated.  The  meeting 
was  at  the  Richmond  House;  Mr.  Dodd 
was  there.  I  was  there,  but  not  as  a  dele 
gate  ;  there  were  no  persons  there  to  repre 
sent  the  South,  or  from  Canada,  to  my 
knowledge.  Mr.  Moss,  from  Missouri,  was 
there,  and  distinguished  himself  in  the 
meeting;  Mr.  Green,  from  Illinois,  was 
there;  and  a  Mr.  Jackson,  I  believe — a 
large  man — from  Ohio;  and  also  Mr.  Val- 
landigham,  who  acted  as  Chairman  of  the 
meeting  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty.  I  was 
present  at  only  a  portion  of  each  meeting. 
When  I  first  went,  Mr.  Moss  was  speaking. 
An  introductory  speech  was  made  by  Mr. 
Vailandigham,  as  Chairman.  He  spoke  in 
reference  to  the  divided  condition  of  the 
Democratic  party;  he  said  that  until  very 
recently  he  had  thought  that  the  Chicago 
onvention  would  result  very  much  as  th$ 
harleston  Convention  did;  that  is,  that  it 
would  break  up;  but  since  he  had  come  to 
Chicago,  and  had  seen  persons  from  all  parts 
of  the  country,  he  had  changed  his  opinion 
on  that  subject;  he  had  found  a  wonderful 
unanimity  of  feeling,  and  oneness  of  idea, 
and  he  believed  the  party  could  be  made 
more  united  and  more  efficient  than  it  had 
3een  for  years;  and  he  did  not  doubt  we 
would  be  able,  through  his  and  others'  in 
strumentality,  to  secure  a  proper  platform 
or  the  party  to  stand  upon.  Vallandig- 
lam  acted  as  Chairman  until  the  close  of 
the  meeting,  and  adjourned  it  to  the  next 
day,  when  he  presided  again.  The  meeting 
was  held  at  the  Richmond  House;  I  think 
;he  rooms  were  Nos.  94,  96,  98,  and  100,  in 
;he  fifth  story;  there  were  folding-doors  by 
which  the  rooms  communicated;  and  prob 
ably  from  one  hundred  and  fifty  to  two 


150 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


hundred  were  present.  Doddwas  there,  and  I  jquence  of  the  Democratic  party  being 
think  Mr.  Barrett,  I  did  not  see  Judge  Bui-  united.  This  meeting  of  the  organization 
litt,  or  Mr.  Piper,  or  Captain  Majors.  I  saw  j  in  Chicago,  at  which  Barrett  made  his  prop- 
Mr.  Swem  in  Chicago,  but  not  at  the  meeting,  losition  for  an  uprising,  was  on  the  20th  of 
Mr.  Yallandigham  presided  at  the  meeting  i  July;  the  second  meeting  was  on  the  29th 
by  a  vote.  1  did  not  know  but  that  the  j  of  August.  Barrett,  who  was  present  at  the 
meetings  were  open,  for  no  one  was  present  meeting,  at  which  Vallandighain  presided, 
at  the  doors,  and  no  password  was  required  made  no  objection  to  the  course  of  the  pro- 


password 

that  I  know  of,  nor  did  I  know  that  all  pres 
ent  were  members.  Mr.  Moss,  in  his  re 
marks,  gave  a  history  of  the  condition  of 
Missouri;  how  the  citizens  there  were  ex 
posed  to  both  rebel  and  Union  troops:  that 
some  really  good  Union  men,  and  others 
really  rebels,  were  suffering  great  indignities 
at  the  hands  of  the  troops.  First  the  rebels 
would  come  along  and  rob  them  of  their 
and  crops;  then  the  Union  troops 
and  took  the  negroes;  that  if  this 


ceedings  on  that  occasion.  Mr.  Dodd  was 
present  at  the  July  meeting.  The  speeches 
made  at  the  meeting  at  which  Vallandig 
hain  presided,  I  thought,  were  addressed  to 
those  who  were  members  of  the  order.  Mr. 
Green,  of  Illinois,  made  a  speech  at  the 
meeting.  I  have  no  recollection  that  the 
strength  of  the  order  was  mentioned  by  any 
present  who  seemed  to  know;  but  one  per 
son  said  it  had  about  five  hundred  thousand 
members.  The  organization  was  referred 


pork 

came 

organization  was  worth  any  thing,  if  it  was  to  by  Mr.  Moss,  and  others,  as  a  distinctive 

intended  to  be  efficient  in  the   restoration  organization  then  existing.     Mr.  Vallandig- 


of  the  Government  under  the  Constitution, 
now  was  the  time  to  strike;  that  these 
indignities  were  unbearable;  and  if  they 
had  true  American  blood  in  them  they 
would  not  bear  it  any  longer,  but  strike  at 
once. 

No  practical  remedy  was  proposed  to 
meet  the  emergency.  The  first  meeting 
was  held  on  Sunday  evening,  the  second  on 
Monday.  On  the  Monday  evening  going  to 
the  Richmond  House,  somewhat  before  the 
meeting,  I  met  John  Singleton  and  Mr. 
Barrett,  of  Missouri.  They  were  endeavor 
ing,  so  I  understood,  to  arrange  for  the  burst 
ing  up  of  the  Convention,  in  case  it  dis 
owned  the  order.  In  that  event  they  would 
make  a  public  demonstration  of  the  order, 
and  proposed  to  nominate  some  candidates 
other  than,  that  nominated  by  the  Conven- 
John  Singleton  had  a  great  many 
mottoes  for  transparencies  made,  some  of 
which  he  read.  They  were  patriotic,  and 
not  connected  with  any  secret  conspiracy; 
some  of  them  were  mottoes  from  the 
speeches  and  writings  of  Douglas,  Jackson, 
Jefferson  and  Washington;  but  they  were 
phrases  which  seemed  to  suit  the  circum 
stances  of  the  times.  At  this  second  meet 
ing  Vallandigham  presided,  and  made  some 
remarks  similar  to  those  he  made  at  the 
first  meeting.  He  drew  out  of  his  pocket  a 
platform,  substantially  the  same  as  that 
adopted  at  the  Chicago  Convention,  which, 
he  said,  he  had  presented  to  most  of  the  dele 
gates,  and  to  members  from  each  of  the 
States,  and  that  it  had  met  with  universal 
approval.  If  he  could  get  that  platform  as 
the  platform  of  the  party,  he  should  be  wil 
ling  to  take  McClellan  as  the  Presidential 
candidate.  He  said  he  would  be  willing  to 
take  any  man  as  a  candidate  if  the  platform 
was  only  right.  He  announced  his  convic 
tion  that,  by  the  adoption  of  this  platform, 
the  organization  would  merge  its  action 
with  that  of  the  Democratic  party.  Single 
ton's  proposition  was  not  adopted,  in  conse- 


ham  presided  when  these  statements  were 
made. 

RE-CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  did  not  understand  that  this  meeting 
was  a  mere  caucus  of  the  friends  of  Mr. 
Vallandigham,  to  consider  matters  that 
would  probably  come  up  at  the  Convention. 
The  gentlemen  who  were  present  at  Chicago, 
representing  the  Sons  of  Liberty,  were 
unanimously  opposed  to  the  nomination  of 
General  McClellan.  The  Mr.  Barrett,  of 
whom  I  have  spoken,  is  from  Missouri.  He 
stated  to  me  that  early  in  this  war,  Mr. 
Douglas  had  suggested  to  him  the  propriety 
of  getting  up  a  regiment,  and  going  on  the 
Plains  to  hold  in  check  marauding  bands, 
which  might  congregate  there,  in  the  terri 
tory;  that  he  had  got  up  a  regiment,  and 
went  down  to  the  neighborhood  of  Pilot 
Knob,  Missouri.  Mr.  Douglas  had  promised 
to  get  some  order  for  him,  but  failing  to  do 
this  he  had  resigned.  Since  then  he  had 
been  engaged  in  sending  persons  across  the 
lines  to  the  Southern  Confederacy.  I  think 
before  the  war,  he  was  a  resident  of  Illinois, 
and  since  raising  the  reginient  he  has 
made  claim  to  Missouri  as  his  State. 

W.  S.  BUSH,  a  witness  for  the  Government, 
was  then  introduced,  and  duly  sworn  by  the 
Judge  Advocate. 

The  Judge  Advocate  proposed  to  intro 
duce  a  speech,  as  reported  by  the  witness, 
and  printed  in  the  Cincinnati  Gazette,  of 
August  16,  1864,  which  was  made  by  the 
accused,  L.  P.  Milligan.  Some  parts  of  the 
report  were  verbatim,  and  othersa  condensed 
report ;  and  he  proposed  to  examine  the  wit 
ness  in  reference  to  its  correctness. 

The  accused  objected  to  its  introduction 
as  incompetent,  and  claimed  that  a  witness 
must  first  state  his  recollection  of  a  speech, 
or  conversation,  and  might  refresh  his 
memory  by  any  memorandum  made  at  the 
time;  but  that  report  could  not  be  used  as 
evidence.  It  was  not  competent  to  intn> 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


151 


duce  a  report  which  was  only  partially  ver 
batim,  in  which  the  omissions  might  give 
a  different  construction  to  what  was  said, 
and  to  ask  the  witness  to  define  what  was 
verbatim,  and  what  was  not. 

The  Judge  Advocate  replied  : 

It  seems  to  me  that  it  is  a  well  established 
rule  that  a  printed  report  of  a  speech,  pub 
lished  in  a  public  journal  at  the  time  it  was 
made,  the  reporter  being  pres-ent  to  state 
whether  the  report  of  the  speech  is  or  is 
not  correct,  can  always  be  introduced  in 
evidence.  I  recollect  a  somewhat  similar 
question  occurred  in  the  trial  of  Captain 
ITurtt,  at  Cincinnati,  which  was  strongly 
argued  by  his  able  counsel,  T.  D.  Lincoln 
and  Colonel  Jackson.  I  had  introduced, 
on  the  part  of  the  Government,  private 
letters  which  had  been  written  by  him, 
containing  disloyal  sentiments,  or  senti 
ments  tending  to  injure  the  Government; 
and,  to  rebut  the  force  of  those  letters,  his 
counsel  proposed  to  introduce  articles  writ 
ten  by  him  and  printed  in  the  Ohio  Slate 
Journal,  of  which  he  was  one  of  the  editors, 
showing  that  he  had  labored,  by  his  speeches 
and  in  the  leading  articles  of  his  paper,  to 
advocate  the  general  cause  of  the  Govern 
ment.  We  were  unable  to  keep  that  evi 
dence  out,  although  we  contested  it  with  as 
much  force  as  we  were  able.  During  this 
trial  we  have  introduced  an  address  of  II. 
H.  Dodd,  in  printed  form,  which  was  de 
livered  as  a  speech  to  the  order  at  one  of 
their  meetings  in  February,  and  no  objec 
tion  was  made  by  the  accused  or  their  coun 
sel. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  replied: 

The  address  of  Mr.  Dodd  was  published 
as  a  correct  official  report  of  his  speech, 
while  the  correctness  of  the  report  of  Mr. 
Milligan's  speech  is  not  yet  proven. 

The  Judge  Advocate  continued  : 

The  gentlemen  now  make  the  issue  on 
the  correctness  of  the  report,  and  not  on 
the  right  to  introduce  the  report  of  that 
speech.  I  allow  the  whole  force  of  his  ar 
gument  to  the  effect  that  it  is  not  compe 
tent  to  introduce  it  as  a  correct  report. 
Now,  then,  I  propose  to  show  that  the  speech, 
as  reported  in  that  paper,  is  a  correct  re 
port,  and  to  prove  its  correctness  by  the  man 
who  reported  it. 

It  may,  perhaps,  be  said  that  it  would 
be  better  to  introduce  the  original  itself. 
It  is  a  rule  that  the  highest  grade  of  testi 
mony  shall  be  introduced  which  it  is  pos 
sible  to  obtain,  or  which  the  case  in  its 
nature  is  susceptible  of;  but  when  the 
original  notes  can  not  be  produced,  is  it  not 
better  to  go  to  the  printed  report  of  the 
speech  than  to  trust  to  the  uncertain  mem 
ory  of  any  witness? 

The  President  of  the  Commission  said 
the  document  referred  to  as  the  address  of 
the  Grand  Commander  to  the  Grand  Coun 
cil,  came  to  us  in  the  shape  of  an  official 


document,  in  the  minutes  of  the  order. 
This  report  purports  to  be  a  speech  made 
by  one  of  the  accused,  and  published  in 
the  newspapers  of  the  country,  and  only 
when  its  identity  is  proven  is  it  compe 
tent  in  evidence. 

The  Judge  Advocate  replied: 

One  is  a  speech  made  in  an  official  capa 
city,  and  the  other  is  simply  an  ordinary 
speech  to  the  masses.  We  can  introduce 
the  admissions  and  speeches  of  a  man,  made 
upon  any  and  all  occasions  as  against  him- 
self,  if  necessary.  I  propose  to  introduce  it,  if 
for  no  other  purpose  than  to  show  that  while 
the  accused  was  a  member  of  this  order, 
knowing  its  intents  and  purposes,  and 
while  this  order  was  being  agitated  with 
plans  for  the  release  of  rebel  prisoners, 
marching  upon  Indianapolis,  Louisville,  New 
Albany  and  other  places,  and  attempting  to 
overturn  the  Government,  the  accused  was 
abroad  through  the  land  addressing  bodies 
of  men,  and  making  incendiary  speeches 
certain  to  have  the  effect  of  arousing 
their  passions,  and  inciting  to  insurrec 
tion. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  said : 

The  address  comes  in  the  character  of 
an  official  document,  while  the  other  is 
that  of  a  reported  speech.  The  charac 
ter  of  these  two  seems  very  different. 

The  Judge  Advocate  replied : 

I  introduce  the  first  document  not  as 
an  official  document,  in  and  of  itself.  We 
first  had  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Harrison  as 
to  whether  it  was  a  correct  copy  of  Mr. 
Dodd's  speech,  arid  whether  Mr.  Dodd  de 
livered  it  at  that  time.  It  was  only  because 
it  was  a  correct  copy  that  we  were  entitled 
to  introduce  it, 

I  desire  to  introduce  that  paper  itself, 
and  to  submit  to  the  Commission  the  report 
of  the  speech,  as  a  correct  report  of  the 
speech,  arid  the  very  words  used  by  the  ac 
cused. 

The  court  room  was  then  cleared  for  de 
liberating. 

On  the  opening  of  the  Court,  the  Judge 
Advocate  announced  to  the  accused  that 
the  Court  had  decided  that  the  objection 
was  premature  at  the  present  stage  of  the 
examination  of  the  witness,  and  the  objec 
tion  was  overruled. 

The  witness,  in  reply  to  the  questions  of 
the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  follows: 

You  may  state  whether  you  were  present 
at  a  convention  at  Fort  Wayne,  Indiana, 
on  the  loth  of  August,  and  if  so,  whether 
or  not  you  reported  any  speeches  made  at 
that  time  ? 

Answer.     I  was  present  at  that  meeting    i 
and   made  a   full  report  of  Mr.   Milligan's 
speech,  and  partial  reports  of  the  speeches 
of  A.  M.  Jackson,  of  Ohiovand  C.  W.  Reeve*,    ( 
of  Plymouth,  Marshall  county. 

Q.  What  was  your  occupation  at  that 
time? 


152 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


A.  I  was  reporting  for  the  Cincinnati  Ga 
zette  the  speeches  made  at  political  meet 
ings  of  both  parties  in  Indiana. 

Q.  Did  you  at  that  time  make  a  report 
of  Mr.  Milligan's  speech? 

A.  I  did  ;  Mr.  Milligan's  speech  was  made 
on  Saturday.  I  wrote  my  report  on  Sun 
day  in  part  or  in  whole,  and  returned  to 
Cincinnati  Monday  morning. 

Q.  Did  you  take  short  hand  notes  of  that 
'•speech  at  the  time  it  was  delivered? 

A.  I  did,  sir. 

Q.  How  large  an   audience  was  present  ? 

A.  I  estimated  it  at  five  thousand  persons. 

Q.  Have  you  looked  at  your  notes  or  at 
the  report  in  the  paper,  to  refresh  your 
memory  ? 

A.  My  notes  were  destroyed  at  the  time 
the  report  was  made.  I  have  seen  the  re 
port  since,  but  have  not  carefully  examined 
it  to  refresh  my  memory. 

Q.  Do  you  now  recollect  the  main  points 
of  that  speech  ? 

A.  I  do,  sir. 

Q.  State  to  the  Court  what  was  said  by 
Mr.  Milligan  on  the  state  of  the  country, 
whether  it  was  prosperous  or  otherwise  ? 

A.  He  referred  to  the  country  as  desola 
ted  by  this  war,  and  the  oppressions  of  the 
Administration.  That  was  the  general 
tenor  of  his  remarks  on  that  point. 

Q,  What  did  he  state  in  reference  to 
the  freedom  of  the  press  and  of  speech  ? 

A.  He  spoke  of  the  freedom  of  speech 
allowed  as  simply  that  granted  by  a  Lin 
coln  mob — as  a  freedom  in  name  rather 
than  in  fact. 

Q.  What  did  he  say  in  reference  to  the 
draft  or  conscription? 

A.  Prior  to  Mr.  Milligan's  speech,  a  series 
of  resolutions  was  adopted  as  the  platform  of 
the  Democracy  of  that  Congressional  dis 
trict  and  of  adjoining  districts.  The  audi 
ence  were  expecting  to  hear  from  him  in 
reference  to  the  draft.  He  stated,  if  the 
war  was  right,  the  draft  was  right,  and  if 
they  considered  the  war  right,  and  were 
good  citizens,  they  would  not  grumble 
about  the  draft. 

Q.  What  else  did  he  say  about  the  right- 
fulness  of  the  war? 

A.  He  denied  that  the  war  was  right, 
and  proceeded  to  argue,  that  under  the 
Constitution  the  President  had  no  power  to 
coerce  a  State,  and  asked  if  those  entered 
the  army  would  look  in  the  future  for 
their  laurels  to  such  battles  as  Bull  Kun, 
Chicamauga,  and  Red  river.  He  also  ap 
pealed  to  them  to  consider  the  condition 
of  their  wives  and  children  at  home,  des 
titute  and  dependent  on  the  charity  of 
their  neighbors,  if  they  entered  the  army, 
and  asked  whether  they  considered  it  a 
duty  to  make  such  a  sacrifice. 

Q.  State  to  the  Court  what  he  said  about 
the  powers  that  be;  whether  they  were  ex 
isting  by  rightful  authority  or  otherwise? 


A.  I  do  not  recollect  his  exact  words,  but 
the  tenor  of  his  remarks  were  that  the 
Administration  had  usurped  power. 

Q.  What  did  he  say  about  the  President 
of  the  United  States  ? 

A.  He  spoke  of  him  as  a  tyrant,  and  an 
usurper,  I  think. 

Q.  What  did  he  say  in  reference  to  the 
arrests  of  disloyal  persons  by  the  Govern 
ment? 

A.  I  do  not  remember  distinctly  the 
words  he  used. 

Q.  Did  he  denounce  arbitrary  arrests  ? 

A.  I  think  he  did. 

Q.  What  did  he  say  about  this  war  being 
inaugurated  for  the  restoration  of  the 
Union,  and  its  power  to  act  in  that  di 
rection  ? 

A.  He  held  that  the  war  itself  was  dis 
union,  and  that  the  Union  could  not  be  re 
stored  by  war. 

Q.  How  did  he  treat  this  Government,  as 
a  unit  or  otherwise  ? 

A.  He  spoke  of  the  Government  as  a 
confederation  of  the  several  States,  rather 
than  a  unity. 

Q.  What  effect  did  he  state  the  war  had 
produced? 

A.  That  it  had  made  the  Government  a 
despotism. 

Q.  How  did  you  understand'him  to  speak 
of  the  Government  at  that  time,  as  a  Gov 
ernment  of  all  the  States,  or  only  of  the 
States  which  were  left  in  the  Union? 

A.  I  understood  him  to  refer  to  what  were 
left. 

Q.  WThat  did  he  say  as  to  whether  the 
Government  was  still  divided  or  existing  as 
a  unit? 

A.  He  treated  the  war  itself  as  a  dissolu 
tion  of  the  Government. 

Q.  Did  he  make  that  statement? 

A.  I  think  he  did. 

Q.  Give  to  the  Court  his  words  as  near  as 
you  can  recollect. 

A.  I  have  not  referred  to  the  report  lately 
for  the  purpose  of  refreshing  my  memory, 
and  can  not  state  positively  what  he  said. 

Q.  What  did  he  state  as  to  the  right  of 
the  Government  of  the  United  States  to 
make  war  upon  rebels,  or  those  in  rebellion 
against  the  General  Government? 

A.  He  denied  the  right, 

Q.  Did  he  state  any  thing  to  the  audience 
in  reference  to  the  number  of  men  who  had 
been  destroyed  in  this  war,  and  the  amount 
of  treasure  expended  ? 

A.  I  think  he  stated  that  two  millions  of 
men  had  lost  their  lives  during  the  war.  I  do 
not  remember  exactly  what  he  said  in  ref 
erence  to  the  amount  of  treasure  expended, 
but  I  believe  he  referred  to  it. 

Q,  What  did  he  state  about  the  prospects 
of  the  war  after  that  expenditure,  as  regards 
the  two  contending  forces? 

A.  He  spoke  of  the  Confederate  Govern 
ment  as  successful,  as  holding  its  own ;  and 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


153 


that  the  future  prosecution  of  the  war  would 
only  tend  to  greater  losses  to  the  United 
States  Government. 

Q.  I  will  ask  you  now  this  general  ques 
tion,  whether  his  speech  at  that  time  was 
loyal,  and  in  favor  of  the  Government,  or 
whether  it  was  disloyal,  and  against  it? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  counsel  for  the 
accused. 

The  Judge  Advocate  stated  that  he  could 
produce  ample  authority  in  favor  of  the  com 
petency  of  the  question. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned  to  Wed 
nesday,  November  16,  at  10  o'clock,  A.  M. 


COURT  BOOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         ) 
November  16,  1864,  10  o'clock,  A.  M.  / 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

All  the  members  present.  Also,  the 
Judge  Advocate,  the  accused,  (except  W. 
A.  Bowles,)  and  their  counsel. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

The  Judge  Advocate  then  submitted  the 
following  in  favor  of  the  competency  of  the 
question  objected  to  yesterday,  by  the  ac 
cused: 

When  the  last  witness  was  upon  the 
stand,  the  accused  objected  that  it  was  not 
competent  evidence  for  the  witness  to  state 
whether  the  general  tenor  o£  Mr.  Milligan's 
speech  was  loyal,  or  disloyal. 

My  duties  have  given  me  but  little  time 
to  search  for  authorities  on  the  point  at 
issue,  and  I  have  not  been  able  to  find  a 
large  number  of  decisions  applicable  to  the 
issue  made  by  the  accused.  I  remember 
very  distinctly,  in  the  commencement  of 
this  trial,  investigating  the  general  prin 
ciple  of  conspiracy,  and  found  the  proposi 
tion  broadly  stated,  in  so  many  words,  that 
you  could  ask  a  witness  who  heard  a  speech 
made  by  a  conspirator  to  an  audience,  of 
which  the  witness  was  part,  whether  the 
general  purport  and  tenor  of  the  speech  was 
against  the  Government  or  for  it. 

I  read  first  a  paragraph  not  so  applicable 
as  others  to  the  question  at  issue,  but  for 
the  purpose  of  bringing  to  the  mind  of  the 
Court  the  class  of  evidence  that  may  be  in 
troduced  in  trials  of  this  character,'  I  read 
from  Roscoe's  Criminal  Evidence,  page  87: 

"Not  only  are  the  acts,  and  the  written 
letters  and  papers,  of  one  of  several  persons 
engaged  in  the  same  conspiracy,  evidence 
against  the  others,  if  done  or  written  in  fur 
therance  of  the  common  purpose,  but  his 
verbal  declarations  are  equally  admissible 
under  similar  restrictions.  Any  declarations 
made  by  one  of  the  party  in  pursuance  of 
the  common  object  of  the  conspiracy,  are 
evidence  against  the  rest  of  the  party,  who 
are  as  much  responsible  for  all  that  has  been 
said  or  done  by  their  associates  in  carrying 
into  effect  the  concerted  plan,  as  if  it  had 
been  pronounced  by  their  own  voice,  or  exe 


cuted  by  their  own  hand.  These  declara 
tions  are  of  the  nature  of  acts;  they  are  in 
reality  acts  done  by  the  party,  and  gen 
erally  they  are  far  more  mischievous  than  acts 
which  consist  only  in  corporal  agency.  All 
consultations,  therefore,  carried  on  by  one 
conspirator,  relative  to  the  general  design, 
and  all  conversations  in  his  presence,  are 
evidence  against  another  conspirator,  though 
absent.  1  Phill.  Ev.,  95,  1th  ed.  The  effect 
of  such  evidence  must  depend  on  a  variety 
of  circumstances,  such  as  whether  the  party 
was  attending  to  the  conversation,  and 
whether  he  approved  or  disapproved;  still 
such  conversations  are  admissible  in  evi 
dence.  See  Eyre  O.  J.,  Hardy  s  case,  24  How. 
St.  Tr.,  704.  In  Lord  George  Gordon's  case, 
the  cry  of  the  mob,  being  part  of  the  trans 
action,  was  held  to  be  admissible  against  the 
prisoner.  21  How.  *SV.  2V*.,  535.  And  upon 
the  same  principle,  the  expressions  of  the 
mob  in  the  Sacheverell  riots,  that  they  de 
signed  to  pull  down  the  meeting-houses, 
were  admitted  in  evidence.  Damorees  case, 
15  How.  St.  Tr.,  552." 

I  read  this  to  bring  before  the  minds  of 
the  Court  the  general  principle  of  con 
spiracy.  On  page  88,  Roscoe's  Criminal  Evi 
dence,  I  find  the  following : 

"As  in  trials  for  conspiracies,  whatever 
the  prisoner  may  have  done  or  said  at  any 
meeting  alleged  to  be  held  in  pursuance  of 
the  conspiracy,  is  admissible  in  evidence  on 
the  part  of  the  prosecution  against  him ;  so, 
on  the  other  hand,  any  other  part  of  his 
conduct  at  the  same  meetings,  will  be 
allowed  to  be  proved  on  his  behalf.  For 
the  intention  and  design  of  a  party  at  a 
particular  time  are  best  explained  by  a 
complete  view  of  every  part  of  his  conduct 
at  that  time,  and  not  merely  from  the  proof 
of  a  single  and  insulated  act  or  declaration. 
Phill.  Ev.,  499,  8th  ed.  On  the  trial  for  an 
indictment  to  overthrow  the  Government, 
evidence  was  given  to  show  that  the  con 
spiracy  was  brought  into  overt /act  at  meet 
ings,  in  the  presence  of  the  prisoner  Walker. 
His  counsel  was  allowed  to  ask,  whether  at 
those  times,  he  had  heard  Walker  utter  any 
word  inconsistent  with  the  duty  of  a  good 
subject.  He  was  also  allowed  to  inquire 
into  the  general  declarations  of  the  prisoner 
at  the  meetings,  and  whether  the  witness 
had  heard  him  say  any  thing  that  had  a 
tendency  to  disturb  the  peace.  Ibid.,  23  How. 
St.  Tr.,  1131;  31  Id.,  43." 

I  do  not  propose  to  go  into  any  lengthy 
discussion  of  this  subject,  as  1  have  drawn 
from  the  witness  the  main  points  of  the 
speech.  I  am  certain,  however,  that  the  law 
goes  further  than  I  have  even  claimed.  That 
I  have  the  right  to  ask  whether  Mr.  Milli- 
gan,  in  talking  to  that  crowd,  spoke  for  or 
against  the  Government,  is  conceded  by  the 
authorities;  and  each  loyal  man  of  the  land 
is  perfectly  cognizant  of  what  is  loyalty,  and 
what  is  disloyalty.  This  is  not  a  question 


154 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


of  opinion,  but  one  of  fact.  It  is  an  old  re 
mark  that  every  man  is  for  his  Government 
or  against  it.  The  dividing  line  is  clear  to 
the  mind  of  every  man  who  heard  that 
speech.  Now,  I  propose  to  ask  the  witness 
who  reported  that  speech,  whether  it  was 
for  the  Government,  or  against  it.  There 
on  the  13th  of  August,  when  the  uprising 
was  to  take  place  on  the  16th,  he  was 
making  an  incendiary  speech,  at  the  very 
time  when  Dr.  Wilson  testifies  that  nearly 
every  man  in  his  county  belonging  to  the 
order  knew  that  the  insurrection  was  to 
take  place  on  the  16th  of  August. 

The  accused  replied: 

I  have  not  had  an  opportunity  to  search 
the  law  upon  this  point,  but  it  seems  to  me 
it  does  not  support  the  point  made  by  the 
Judge  Advocate.  He  states  that  this  speech 
was  made  a  few  days  previous  to  the  time 
when  this  uprising  was  to  take  place.  The 
exposition  of  the  order  was  made  on  the 
29th  of  July,  and  the  testimony  given 
shows  that  the  whole  project  was  aban 
doned,  and  that  messengers  had  been  dis 
patched  to  the  people  making  that  an 
nouncement.  Instead  of  that  speech  being 
made  to  goad  on  the  minds  of  the  people, 
it  was  made  at  the  time  when  this  uprising 
had  been  set  at  naught,  abandoned,  and 
the  whole  thing  exposed  in  the  public 
print.  If  Mr.  Milligan  had  knowledge  of 
this  uprising,  it  is  fair  to  presume  that  he 
had  knowledge  of  its  abandonment.  It  is 
said  that  this  speech  was  made  for  the  pur 
pose  of  inflaming  the  minds  of  the  popu 
lace;  but  that  is  a  matter  for  the  considera 
tion  of  the  Court  in  summing  up  the  case. 
It  is  competent  for  the  prosecution  to  ask 
the  witness  the  general  question,  "Was  that 
speech  loyal,  and  in  favor  of  the  Govern 
ment,  or  disloyal,  and  against  the  Govern 
ment?" 

You  will  notice  that  Walker  had  ex 
pressed  no  sentiments ;  and  when  the  Gov 
ernment  undertook  to  prove  his  sentiments, 
he  had  the  right  to  object,  that  the  Govern 
ment  could  prove  intents  only  by  affirma 
tive  acts,  and  not  by  mere  opinions.  We 
may,  on  the  contrary,  introduce  evidence  to 
show  that  his  sentiments  were  not  disloyal, 
and  propose  to  prove  that  he  made  no  re 
mark  tending  to  such  a  conclusion  as  that, 
If  they  will  ask  the  witness  what  was  the 
substance  of  his  remarks,  in  regard  to  obe 
dience  to  the  Constitution  and  the  draft,  or 
against  .enforcing  the  draft,  I  make  no  ob 
jection;  but  they  can  not  ask  the  witness 
whether  the  whole  speech  was  in  favor  of 
the  Government,  and  loyal,  or  against  the 
Government,  and  disloyal.  Look  at  the 
fallacy  of  such  a  position.  There  is  not  a 
speech  made,  but  what  you  can  find  an  in 
dividual  who  will  come  up  and  swear  that 
it  is  disloyal;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  you 
could  find  some  Democrat  who  would  swear 
that  the  tendency  of  the  speech  was  loyal 


and  in  favor  of  the  Constitution.  I  take 
for  granted  the  witness  would  say  the 
speech  was  disloyal ;  and,  I  dare  say,  a  Dem 
ocrat  would  say  it  was  calculated" to  main 
tain  the  Constitution.  You,  gentlemen  of 
the  Commission,  are  to  decide  what  this 
tendency  is.  The  prisoner  is  charged  with 
disloyal  practices,  and  the  opinion  of  the 
witness  as  to^the  effect  of  his  speech, 
whether  disloyal  or  not,  is  not  competent 
evidence.  Most  of  the  members  of  this 
Commission  are  lawyers;  and  they  know 
that  it  is  a  question  at  one  time  mooted, 
how  the  damages  were  to  be  ascertained  in 
a  case  of  actual  slander.  The  facts  must 
be  given  to  the  jury,  and  they  must  fix  the 
amount.  So  the  i'acts  in  regard  to  this 
speech,  the  declarations  must  be  given  to 
the  Court,  and  they  must  decide  whether  it 
is  loyal  or  not,  It  is  a  matter  of  political 
controversy,  whether  the  Administration  is 
or  is  not  the  Government.  Some  would  in- 
sis^  that  every  thing  said  against  the  Ad 
ministration,  is  disloyalty  to  the  Govern 
ment,  Other  witnesses  would  say  that  the 
Administration  is  only  one-third  part  of  the 
Government.  We  would,  therefore,  have 
to  inquire  of  the  witness  what  his  political 
views  were,  to  understand  what  he  meant 
by  loyalty. 

Mr.  Greenleaf,  in  treating  upon  the  sub 
ject  of  evidence  in  courts-martial,  lays  down 
the  same  general  considerations  by  which 
courts  of  law  are  governed. 

He  says,  in  paragraph  476: 

"It  has  already  been  intimated  that 
courts-martial  are  bound,  in  general,  to  ob 
serve  the  rules  of  the  law  of  evidence  by 
which  the  courts  of  criminal  jurisdiction 
are  governed.  The  only  exceptions  which 
are  permitted,  are  those  which  are  of  neces 
sity  created  by  the  nature  of  the  service,  and 
by  the  constitution  of  the  court  and  ite 
course  of  proceeding." 

Again,  paragraph  478,  he  says: 

"  The  opinions  of  witnesses  are,  perhaps, 
more  frequently  called  for  in  military  trials 
than  in  any  others;  but  the  rule  which 
governs  their  admissibility,  is  the  same  here 
as  elsewhere,  and  has  already  been  stated 
in  a  preceding  volume.  But  it  is  proper 
here  to  add,  that  where  the  manner  of  the 
act,  or  of  the  language  with  which  the  pris 
oner  is  charged,  is  essential  to  the  offense, 
as  whether  the  act  was  menacing  or  insult 
ing,  or  cowardly,  or  unskillful,  or  not;  or 
whether  the  language  was  abusive  or  sar 
castic,  or  playful,  the  opinion  which  the 
witness  formed  at  the  time,  or  the  impres 
sion  it  then  made  upon  his  mind,  being 
cotemporaneous  with  the  fact,  and  parta 
king  of  the  res  gestce,  is  not  only  admissible, 
but  is  a  fact  in  the  case  which  he  is  bound 
to  testify." 

Just  so  here.  The  facts  are  before  the 
Court.  Is  it  fair  to  receive  the  opinion  of 
the  witness  upon  the  general  tenor  of  the 


TREASON    TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


155 


speech  as  to  its  loyalty  or  disloyalty?  You, 
gentlemen  of  the  Commission,  are  thor 
oughly  versed  in  the  politics  of  the  day,  and 
quite  as  competent  to  decide  whether  these 
declarations  are  loyal  or  disloyal,  as  is  the 
witness. 

The  court  room  was  then  cleared  for  delib 
erating  on  the  objection  of  the  accused. 

On  reopening  the  court  room,  the  Judge 
Advocate  announced  that  the  objection 
had  been  sustained,  and  the  question  over 
ruled. 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate : 

Please  state  to  the  Court  whether  at  that 
time  you  had  any  conversation  with  Mr. 
Milligan. 

Answer.  I  do  not  know  that  I  had  any 
conversation  with  him  the  clay  of  the  meet 
ing,  but  I  did  the  day  after. 

Q.  Did  Mr.  Milligan  know,  at  the  time  he 
made  that  speech,  what  was  the  action  of 
the  State  Central  Committee  at  their  meet 
ing  on  the  12th  and  13th  of  August  ? 

A.  I  learned  from  another  gentleman 
what  the  action  of  the  committee  had  been, 
and  I  asked  Mr.  Milligan  if  he  had  heard 
of  their  action.  He  answered  that  he  had 
not.  I  then  told  him  that  General  Manson 
had  been  nominated  as  Lieutenant  Gov 
ernor.  He  seemed  surprised,  and  remarked 
that  it  looked  as  if  it  had  been  done  to 
spite  us. 

Q.  That  was  the  next  day  after  his  speech 
was  made,  was  it  not  ? 

A.  It  was  on  Sunday  afternoon. 

Q.  When  did  Mr.  Milligan  make  this 
speech? 

A.  On  Saturday  afternoon,  August  13th, 
1864. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  the  Saturday  preceding 
your  conversation  with  Mr.  Milligan? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  did  Mr.  Milligan  say  at  that 
meeting  in  reference  to  the  draft  ?  Did  he 
advise  the  people  to  submit  and  aid  the 
Government  in  the  enrollment,  or  did  he 
advise  them  to  oppose  it? 

A.  Nothing  was  said  about  the  enroll 
ment. 

Q.  Was  any  thing  said  about  the  draft  ? 

A.  Tfre  draft  was  expected  on  the  5th 
of  September,  1864.  This  meeting  was  on 
the  13th  of  August.  He  spoke  in  favor  of 
the  draft  as  the  best  mode  of  getting  sol 
diers.  He  said  if  the  war  was  right,  the 
draft  was  right ;  but  the  war  was  wrong,  and 
the  draft  was  wrong;  and  he  spoke  of  those 
who  went  into  the  army  as  making  a  sacri 
fice  of  life  instead  of  a  risk. 

Q.  Will  you  give  the  substance  of  his  re 
marks  and  the  manner  in  which  he  spoke 
about  the  war? 

A.  I  think  he  spoke  about  the  war  as  un 
justifiable,  and  a  dishonorable  war.  I  am 
not  positive  about  the  word  dishonorable. 

Q.  Whnt  did  he  say  upon  the  subject  of 
peace  and  of  quitting  fighting  ? 


A.  He  was  in  favor  of  stopping  hostilities, 
and  allowing  the  South  the  terms  she  had 
always  asked. 

Q.  What  were  those  terms? 

A.  To  be  let  alone. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

The  meeting  referred  to  was  a  Demo 
cratic  mass  meeting,  called  by  the  Peace 
Democracy  to  take  action  in  regard  to  the 
draft.  I  learned  this  first  from  Captain 
Bracken,  who  said  that  he  learned  it  from 
Mr.  Barry,  who  was  acting  as  correspond 
ent  of  the  Chicago  Times.  I  understood 
that  on  the  morning  of  the  meeting  there 
had  been  a  caucus  there,  composed  of  indi 
viduals  who  were  opposed  to  adopting  any 
resolution  as  their  platform,  as  well  as  of 
those  who  were  in  favor  of  adopting  it. 
After  the  radical  peace  men  carried  their 
point  in  regard  to  the  adoption  of  resolu 
tions,  I  understood  that  those  withdrew. 
The  convention  numbered  about  five  thou 
sand.  I  went  to  that  meeting  as  the  repor 
ter  for  the  Cincinnati  Gazette.  I  was  not  in 
the  employment  of  the  Government  at  the 
time.  I  sent  a  telegraphic  dispatch  of  Mr. 
Milligan's  speech  to  the  Cincinnati  Gazette, 
which  was  confined  mainly  to  the  resolu 
tions  adopted.  The  report  of  the  meeting, 
as  well  as  the  telegraphic  dispatch  of  the 
resolutions,  was  made  by  me.  I  called  Mr. 
Milligan  "Dr.  Milligan,"  because  I  had  thus 
heard  him  spoken  of.  In  his  speech  he  said 
the  wrar  was  an  unjustifiable  and  unconstitu 
tional  one.  Then  he  spoke  of  the  draft,  and 
appealed  to  his  hearers  in  regard  to  making 
a  sacrifice  of  life,  and  of  the  comforts  and 
happiness  of  their  families,  and  then  asked 
them  if  they  thought  it  best  to  go  into  the 
army.  In  making  this  argument,  he  ap 
pealed  to  his  audience  for  approval,  and 
they  indorsed  what  he  said.  He  said  if  the 
war  was  right,  the  draft  was  right;  and  he 
said  that  the  draft  was  the  best  method  for 
raising  men.  I  can  not  say  that  he  advised 
submission  to  the  draft.  He  said  that 
those  who  believed  the  war  was  right  ought 
to  go,  and  not  growl  about  the  draft.  He 
lid  not  discuss  party  differences;  but  in 
bis  remarks  he  opposed  the  war  and  the 
Grovernment;  his  remarks  against  the  Gov 
ernment  were  loudly  cheered.  In  speak- 
"ng  of  the  Administration,  I  do  not  remem 
ber  his  referring  to  the  different  depart 
ments  of  the  Executive;  1  understood  him 
to  speak  of  the  Government  as  a  whole : 
and  he  did  not  single  out  any  one  or 
any  department,  except,  perhaps,  the  Presi 
dent.  He  said  nothing  denunciatory  of 
the  Constitution,  but  the  whole  tenor  of 
his  speech  was  in  favor  of  the  Constitution 
as  he  construed  it.  His  construction  of  it  per 
mitted  States  to  secede  at  will,  and  denied  to 
the  Government  the  right  of  coercion.  The 
resolutions  adopted  referred  more  to  the 
draft,  and  were  denunciatory  of  it  and  the 


156 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


war  generally,  rather  than  to  its  having  influ 
ence  upon  the  Chicago  Convention.      Th< 
name  of  the  Chairman  of  the  Committee  or 
Resolutions  was  Mr.  O'Rourke.     1  was  no 
present  at  the  convention  that  met  in   the 
morning.     The  resolutions  were  reported  to 
the   meeting   before   the  speaking  began 
they  were  first  in  order.     I  understood  Mr 
Milligan  to  say  that  about  two  millions  of 
men  had  fallen  in  this  war.     He  spoke  of 
two  million  seven  hundred  thousand  men 
having  gone  into  the  army  and  made  a  sac 
rifice  of  life,  while  the  rebels  still  held  theii 
own;    and    my    deduction    was    that    the 
great  majority  of  them  had  lost  their  lives. 
He  said  that  while   the  Government  had 
called  out  two  million  seven  hundred  thoir 
sand  men,  we  were  not  able  to  make  any 
headway,  while    the  rebels   were  holding 
their  own.     At  the  time  of  the  meeting,  1 
intended  to   give    a   full   report  of  all  the 
points  of  the  speech  in  Mr.  Milligan's  own 
language,  condensing  his  references  to  Colo 
nial  history,  and  his  discussion  of  the  con 
stitutional   right   of  coercion,  and  perhaps 
some  minor  points;  otherwise,  I  think  the 
report  is  correct,  and   many  parts  of  it  are 
verbatim.     I  consider  the  report  more  re 
liable  than  my  recollection  of  the  meeting. 
I    wrote    my  report  partly   or   wholly  on 
Sunday,  and   it   was  printed  in  the  Gazette 
on  the  Tuesday  following.     I  glanced  over 
the  report  when  it  appeared  in  the  paper, 
and  I  recognized  it  as  the  one  I  had  made. 
Mr.    Milligan   did    not   perhaps  say,    in  so 
many  words,  that  the   President    had   not 
the    power    to    coerce  the  rebels;  he  was 
speaking  of  the   right  of  the   Government 
to  subdue  sovereign  States,  and  my  conclu 
sion  was  that  those  were  rebellious   States. 
I  think  he   spoke   of  the   right   to  coerce 
sovereign  States,   and   the  right  to  coerce 
people  who  had  chosen  to  leave  the  Union, 
referring  not  only  to  the  States,  but  to  the 
people;    and   he  may   have  been   talking 
about  the  right  of  revolution.     I  think  he 
denied  not  only  the  right  to  coerce  States, 
but  individuals  also.     The  character  of  the 
paper  for  which  I  was  reporting  is  that  of  a 
general  newspaper;  I  do  not  regard  it  as  a 
partisan   newspaper,  and    do  not  think  it 
claims  to  be  the  organ  of  any   party.      It 
may  have  been  regarded  as  a  Republican 
paper ;   it  certainly  is  in  favor  of  the  Union. 
Since  I  have  been  acquainted  with  it,  it  has 
taken  an  independent  course,  and  has  sup 
ported  the  Union  candidates  whenever  its 
editors   saw   fit  to  support  them,  and   ap 
proved    or    criticised    the    Administration 
whenever   they    thought  they  had  reason 
for  so  doing.     I  have  no  recollection  of  Mr. 
Milligan  or  any  other  speaker  being  cheered 
for  speaking  in  favor  of  the  Government. 
In  addition  to  Mr.  Humphreys,  Mr.  Jackson 
and  Mr.  Read  spoke  at   that  meeting,  and 
were  all  cheered;  and  Mr.  Humphreys  was 
loudly  cheered   when  he  took  the  stand. 


Mr.  Milligan  was  cheered  not  only  when 
he  spoke  against  the  policy  of  the  Govern 
ment,  but  also  when  he  spoke  against  the 
war;  1  do  not  make  any  distinction  be 
tween  the  Government  and  the  Administra 
tion  ;  Mr.  Milligan's  speech  was  an  argu 
mentative  one,  and  contained  many  points 
calculated  to  draw  out  the  approval  of  the 
audience.  My  present  connection  with 
the  Government  is  only  as  one  of  the  Re 
corders  to  this  Commission.  I  have  acted 
with  both  parties.  I  acted  with  the  Demo 
cratic  party  in  1859.  I  voted  for  Mr.  Lincoln. 

Q.  Was  there  any  thing  more  denuncia 
tory  of  the  Administration  in  Mr.  Milligan's 
remarks  than  in  the  remarks  of  the  other 
gentlemen  who  spoke  there  on  that  day? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate,  and  withdrawn. 

There  was,  perhaps,  nothing  more  offen 
sive  in  Mr.  Milligan's  speech  than  there  is 
in  the  average  of  Democratic  speeches  de 
livered  during  the  present  campaign.  There 
might  have  been  less  abuse  in  Mr.  Milligan'a 
speech  than  in  some  other  speeches  that 
have  been  delivered,  and  more  than  in 
others. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Mr.  Milligan  in  his  speech  that  day  used 
:he  term  Government  rather  than  Adminis 
tration,  and  I  do  not  recollect  his  making 
any  distinction  between  the  Government  and 
:he  Adminstration.  He  said  that  if  the  war 
was  right,  the  draft  was  right;  but  he  denied 
:hat  the  war  had  been,  or  could  be  consti 
tutional  and  right. 

NICHOLAS  COCHRANE,  a  witness  for  the  Gov 
ernment,  was  then  introduced,  and.  being 
duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified 
as  follows: 

I  reside  in  Jackson  township,  Sullivan 
ounty,  Indiana.  I  am  acquainted  with  Mr. 
Humphreys,  one  of  the  accused.  I  have 
seen  him  a  few  times.  I  reside  nine  or  ten 
iiiles  from  him.  I  heard  Mr.  Humphreys 
m  one  occasion  speak  in  Jackson  township. 
L'he  occasion  was  said  to  be  a  Democratic 

nic.  I.  think  it  was  about  the  15th  of 
September,  1863,  a  year  ago;  at  any  rate,  it 
vas  the  day  after  Mr.  Collins  was  shot  in 
ferre  Haute  by  Mr.  Brown.  Mr.  Hum- 
hreys  spoke  of  that  in  my  hearing.  There 
night  have  been  three  hundred  people, 
nore  or  less,  present;  the  meeting  was  out 
f  doors.  Mr.  Humphreys  was  standing  in 
i  wagon-bed.  Besides  Mr.  Humphreys,  there 
vere  Mr.  Hammil,  an  attorney  at  law,  Mr. 
Edward  Price,  an,d  an  attorney  named  Bur- 
on,  besides  another  person  whose  name  I 
do  not  know.  This  latter  said  he  was  a  rebel 
rom  the  State  of  Georgia,  I  believe.  He 
aid  he  did  not  know  why  he  was  required 
o  speak  to  the  audience  there,  composed  as 
t  was  mostly  of  farmers,  unless  it  was  that 
hey  had  heard  a  great  deal  about  rebels 
md  had  never  seen  one,  and  that  he  was  a 


TREASON  TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


157 


rebel  from  Georgia.  Mr.  Humphreys  was  pres 
ent  when  the  rebel  spoke.  Mr.  Humphreys 
made  the  first  speech,  and  a  short  one  again 
afterward.  I  remember  that  he  criticised  the 
Administration  somewhat  strongly.  He 
seemed  to  be  solicitous  for  peace,  and  to  be 
opposed  to  the  war ;  and  he  seemed  to  think 
that  the  Democratic  party  was  imposed 
upon,  and  ought  to  stand  up  for  their 
rights.  He  said  that  the  time  had  come 
when  Democrats  should  not  appropriate 
their  money,  or  be  willing  to  spend  their 
means  in  levity,  but  should  be  preparing  for 
self-defense.  The  general  run  of  his  speech 
was  in  opposition  to  the  present  Adminis 
tration.  The  rebel  from  the  State  of  Georgia 
remarked  that  he  was  not  concerned  about 
our  State  policy,  for  he  did  not  belong  to 
our  State ;  but  he  had  a  piece  of  advice  that 
he  would  give  to  his  friends,  and  that  was, 
to  resist  the  present  abolition  Administra 
tion  at  the  sacrifice  of  their  means,  their  fami 
lies,  and  themselves,  if  necessary;  and  that 
for  nothing  short  of  that  would  he  call  them 
honorable.  I  can  not  say  particularly 
whether  these  remarks  called  forth  appro 
bation  or  disapprobation.  There  were  sev 
eral  cheers,  and  the  people  said  that  he  was 
a  good-looking  fellow;  he  was  considerably 
cheered  at  the  close  of  his  speech.  I  do  not 
remember  hearing  any  hissing  or  any  marks 
of  disapprobation  at  any  thing  he  said.  Mr. 
Harnmil,  Mr.  Burton,  Mr.  Allen  and  Mr. 
Humphreys  were  in  the  wagon,  but  I  am 
not  positive  they  were  in  when  the  rebel 
spoke.  He  spoke  about  the  death  of  Col 
lins,  and  advised  the  crowd  to  go  home. 
He  said  he  had  received  a  dispatch  stating 
that  he  would  probably  be  arrested  that 
night;  and  I  heard  from  another  source 
that  such  a  dispatch  had  been  carried  to 
him.  The  crowd  then  dispersed. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  staid  during  the  whole  of  the  speech. 
I  have  forgotten  the  name  of  the  rebel  from 
Georgia,  but  it  seems  to  me  they  called  him 
Captain  Manderville.  He  did  not  say  th0,t 
he  had  taken  the  oath  of  allegiance  to  the 
United  States  Government,  or  that  he  had 
been  in  the  Quartermaster's  Department 
for  several  months.  When  Mr.  Humphre)rs 
spoke  of  the  death  of  this  man  and  the  dis 
patch  that  he  had  received,  and  that  it  was 
likely  that  he  would  be  arrested,  n*e  spoke 
quite  solemnly. 

The  Judge  Advocate  here  announced  to 
the  Commission  that  he  had  closed  the 
case  on  the  part  of  the  Government. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Thursday,  November  17,  1864,  at  9 
o'clock,  A.  M. 

COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         ) 
November  17, 1864,  9  o'clock,  A.  M.  j 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  ad 
journment. 


All  the  members  present,  except  Colonel 
Wass.  Also,  the  Judge  Advocate,  the  ac 
cused  (except  W.  A.  Bowles),  and  their 
counsel. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

WILLIAM  G.  Moss,  a  witness  for  the  ac 
cused,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly 
sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as 
follows  : 

I  reside  in  Green  county,  Indiana,  and 
am  a  farmer.  I  was  elected  Sheriff  of  the 
county  in  1856,  and  served  until  1860,  when 
I  was  elected  as  Representative,  and  served 
in  two  sessions  of  the  Legislature.  I  waft 
re-elected  Sheriff  last  October.  I  am  ac 
quainted  with  Mr.  Humphreys;  have  been 
a  neighbor  of  his  for  about  twenty-two 
years,  and  was  in  partnership  with  him  in 
the  mercantile  business  for  nearly  a  year. 
I  joined  an  order  called  the  American 
Knights,  in  September,  1863.  I  took  the 
first,  degree  in  our  store,  in  Green  county. 
This  was  before  I  entered  into  partnership 
with  Mr.  Humphreys.  I  believe  he  was  at 
a  meeting  of  the  order  in  Indianapolis  on 
the  16th  or  17th  of  February,  1864.  1  did 
not  know  of  the  meeting  at  the  time  I 
came  here  to  visit  Indianapolis  on  business. 
When  here  I  met  Mr.  Heffren  and  Mr. 
Malott,  from  Sullivan.  They  insisted  on 
my  going  to  the  meeting.  I  was  present 
when  an  election,  or  an  appointment  of 
officers,  took  place;  major  generals  and  dep 
uty  commanders,  probably,  but  I  am  not 
certain,  and  other  officers,  were  appointed. 
Mr.  Milligan,  Mr.  Humphreys,  Mr.  Walker, 
and  probably  Mr.  Bowles,  were  elected  or 
appointed  Major  Generals.  I  took  back  to 
my  own  county  the  news  of  this  meeting, 
and  in  a  few  days  after  the  meeting  I  saw 
Mr.  Humphreys,  and  I  informed  him  of 
what  had  taken  place — that  he  was  ap 
pointed  a  Major  General. 

Q,  What  did  he  say  about  it  ? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate,  and  withdrawn. 

Q.  Were  you  authorized  to  take  the  news 
of  that  election  to  Mr.  Humphreys  ? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  requested 
the  Judge  Advocate  to  state  his  grounds  of 
objection. 

The  rule  of  law  is  clear,  that  while  in  the 
prosecution  of  cases  of  conspiracy,  the  Gov 
ernment  may  prove  the  admissions  of  the 
accused  as  against  him,  he  can  not,  in  his 
own  defense,  prove  counter  statements 
which  were  made  at  any  different  time 
than  the  specific  time  when  the  admissions 
are  proven.  In  illustration  of  what  I  mean, 
suppose  I  prove  that  in  a  certain  conversa 
tion  Mr.  Milligan  made  certain  admissions 
to  any  party,  they  may  call  out  that  entire 
conversation,  and  any  explanatory  facts  and 
statements  he  then  made  in  his  own  behalf. 
But  while  I  may  prove  any  distinct  admis- 


158 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


sion  as  against  him,  they  can  not  prove  any 
distinct,  separate  statements  in  his  favor. 
Such  a  rule  of  law  as  is  contended  for  by 
the  accused,  would  destroy  the  possibility 
of  the  conviction  of  any  individual  for  crime. 
If  an  individual  is  indicted  for  murder,  the 
act  may  be  proven  against  him,  and  his  ad 
missions  as  against  himself;  but  any  counter 
statements  after  the  deed,  to  the  effect  he 
did  it  in  self-defense,  or  in  defense  of  his 
property,  can  not  be  admitted  in  his  favor. 
In  conspiracy  trials,  the  rule  is:  if  a  person 
is  engaged  in  a  common  conspiracy,  and 
addresses  a  meeting,  or  is  at  any  of  the 
meetings  of  the  Council  where  the  general 
purposes  of  the  conspiracy  were  discussed, 
if  the  State  proves  against  him  any  distinct 
statements  or  admissions,  the  defense  may 
call  out  all  the  statements  and  surround 
ings  under  which  it  was  made,  as  a  part  of 
the  res  gestce;  but  they  can  not  go  into  any 
separate  statement  made  at  a  different  time 
and  place.  These  distinct  statements  stand 
alone,  and  not  as  part  of  the  res  gestas.  The 
accused  can  not  exculpate  himself  from 
crime  by  his  own  assertions. 

The  accused  replied: 

The  accused  have  come  to  the  conclusion 
that  they  have  no  other  resort  to  vindicate 
themselves  from  the  inferences  which  the 
Judge  Advocate  seeks  to  raise  against  them, 
than  to  introduce  testimony  concerning 
their  own  relations  to  and  declarations 
about  the  order.  If  we  can  not  introduce 
our  repudiation  and  rejection  of  the  office 
which  was  attempted  to  be  thrust  upon  us 
in  our  absence,  and  show  that  from  the 
moment  we  knew  of  it  until  the  dissolution 
of  the  order,  we  repudiated  it,  then  we 
have  no  opportunity  to  vindicate  ourselves 
from  the  charges  sought  to  be  proven  against 
us.  It  has  been  shown  by  the  prosecution 
that  Humphreys  was  elected  a  Major  Gen 
eral  at  the  February  meeting  of  the  order, 
which  he  did  not  attend,  and  of  which  he 
could  have  no  knowledge  at  the  time,  nor 
until  he  was  informed  of  it,  and  that  is  as 
far  as  the  evidence  shows  his  connection 
with  it.  Another  fact  has  been  proven, 
namely,  that  the  military  branch  of  the 
order  was  intended  for  the  subversion  of 
the  Union,  detaching  certain  States,  either 
to  form  a  North-western  Confederacy,  or  be 
attached  to  the  Southern  Confederacy  ;  and 
from  this  fact  will  be  argued  the  treasona 
ble  character  of  the  military  part  of  the 
order.  Now,  the  accused  is  only  connected 
with  the  military  part  of  the  order  by  the 
fact  of  his  election  as  a  Major  General, 
which  transpired  in  his  absence,  and  of 
which  there  is  no  proof  he  had  any  knowl 
edge.  Now,  we  present  the  counter  fact, 
that  when  he  was  informed  of  that  election, 
he  rejected  and  repudiated  the  office,  and 
thereafter  had  nothing  to  do  with  that  part 
of  the  order.  That  is  what  we  propose  to 
prove.  The  Judge  Advocate  objects  to  it. 


because  it  is  not  a  part  of  the  conversation 
he  has  seen  proper  to  introduce.  The  Com 
mission  can  not  determine  what  conversa 
tions  he  has  introduced.  It  is  impossible 
to  determine  when  the  conversation  he 
has  introduced  transpired,  and  when  he 
said  certain  things;  as,  for  instance,  they 
have  proven,  or  assume  to  have  proven, 
that  he  accepted  a  Brigadier  Generalship, 
and  agreed  to  command  a  certain  portion 
of  the  forces  in  the  order.  There  is  no  evi 
dence  of  this  fact.  The  whole  history  of 
Mr.  Humphreys'  connection  with  the  order, 
from  his  initiation  until  the  commence 
ment  of  this  trial,  has  been  dragged  before 
this  Commission,  without  reference  to  time 
or  place,  or  under  what  circumstances  his 
admissions  were  made.  To  show  his  char 
acter  and  real  connection  with  the  order, 
we  shall  offer,  and  claim  the  right  to  offer, 
until  it  is  denied  us,  evidence  covering  the 
whole  period  from  his  election  to  a  Major 
Generalship,  to  the  commencement  of  this 
trial,  to  show  that  he  was  guilty  of  no  trea 
sonable  project,  declaration,  act,  or  conspir 
acy.  That,  on  the  contrary,  he  avowed 
himself  ready  to  obey  and  support  the  laws 
and  Constitution  of  his  country,  and  even 
to  death,  and  against  every  proposition  in 
imical  to  the  laws  and  Constitution  of  his 
country. 

You  see,  gentlemen  of  this  Commission, 
that  unless  this  is  permitted,  we  can  not  in 
troduce  any  proof  in  fact,  for  written  com 
munications  are  not  admissible.  There  is  no 
evidence,  but  hearsay,  that  he  accepted  this 
Commission.  There  is  no  evidence  that  he 
is  connected  with  any  treasonable  acts,  or 
tending  to  show  this  fact.  Now,  we  want  to 
show  his  acts,  his  life,  his  confidential  com 
munications  to  his  intimate  friend,  his 
partner.  The  law,  I  grant  you,  is  not  defi 
nite  on  that  point.  I  read  from  Eoscoe's 
Criminal  Evidence,  page  88: 

"The  acts  and  declarations  of  a  prisoner, 
given  in  evidence  in  his  favor,  ought  to  be 
connected  both  in  point  of  subject-matter 
and  of  time,  with  the  acts  or  declarations 
proved  against  him.  See  Phil!.  Ev.,  500, 
8th  ed.  In  the  two  following  cases,  how 
ever,  great  latitude  was  allowed  on  trials  for 
high  treason.  When  the  overt  act  charged 
was,  that  the  prisoner  to  compass  the  King's 
death,  conspired  with  others  to  call  a  con 
vention 'of  the  people,  etc.;  the  prisoner's 
counsel  was  allowed  to  ask  the  witness 
whether,  before  the  time  of  the  convention,  he  had 
ever  heard  from  the  prisoner  what  his  ob 
jects  were,  and  whether  he  had  at  all  mixed 
himself  in  the  business.  Hardy  s  case,  24 
How.  St.  2V.,  1097.  So  in  Home  Teokes  case, 
1  East  P.  O.,  61  ;  25  How.  St.  Tr.,  545,  evi 
dence  having  been  given,  on  the  part  of  the 
crown,  of  several  publications  containing 
republican  doctrines  and  opinions,  which 
had  been  distributed  by  the  prisoner  during 
the  period  assigned  in  the  indictment,  (for 


TREASON  TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


159 


high  treason,)  for  the  existence  of  the  con 
spiracy,  the  prisoner  offered  to  put  in  a 
book,  written  by  him,  expressive  of  his 
veneration  for  the  King  and  the  constitu 
tion ;  this  was  objected  to  as  being  antece 
dent  to  the  period  of  the  conspiracy,  and 
not  relating  to  the  particular  transaction. 
After  argument,  the  book  was  admitted,  on 
the  ground  that  it  had  reference  to  the 
proof  given  in  support  of  the  charge,  to  re 
but  the  idea,  that  a  reform  in  Parliament 
was  a  pretense  made  by  the  prisoner,  and 
that  his  real  object  was  to  overturn  the 
Government." 

Now,  if  the  Judge  Advocate  is  correct  in 
his  conclusions,  there  can  be  introduced 
against  Mr.  Humphreys  the  acts  and  dec 
larations  of  others,  and  implicate  him  in 
their  transactions,  and  make  him  liable  for 
all  that  was  done  at  that  meeting,  in  his 
absence,  unless  he  shows  that  he  repudiated 
the  whole  thing.  Roscoe,  in  another  para 
graph,  says: 

"On  the  trial  of  an  indictment  for  a  con 
spiracy  to  overthrow  the  government,  evi 
dence  was  given  to  show  that  the  conspiracy 
was  brought  into  overt  act,  at  meetings,  in 
the  presence  of  the  prisoner  Walker.  His 
counsel  was  allowed  to  ask,  whether,  at  those 
times,  he  had  heard  Walker  utter  any  word 
inconsistent  with  the  duty  of  a  good  subject. 
He  was  also  allowed  to  inquire  into  the 
general  declarations  of  the  prisoner  at  the 
meetings,  and  whether  the  witness  had 
heard  him  say  any  thing  that  had  a  tend 
ency  to  disturb  the  peace.  Ibid.,  23  How.  St. 
Tr.,  1131;  31  Id.,  43." 

Now,  the  act  of  the  election  is  proved  against 
Mr.  Humphreys.  WTe  propose,  on  the  point 
of  time  and  fact,  to  connect  his  declarations 
on  receiving  the  first  news  of  his  appoint 
ment,  to  show  that  he  repudiated  it,  and 
was  in  no  way  mixed  up  in  the  business. 
We,  also,  propose  to  show,  that  before  the 
time  of  this  illegitimate  uprising,  which  was 
to  have  taken  place  in  pursuance  of  this 
conspiracy,  and  immediately  after  his  elec 
tion  to  military  office,  he  rejected  and  re 
pudiated  his  election,  and  declared  that  he 
would  have  nothing  more  to  do  with  the 
order,  and  would  not  be  mixed  up  with  this 
business  by  the  action  of  others.  The  case 
quoted  of  Hardy,  was  a  simple  hearsay  case. 
The  prisoner's  counsel  was  allowed  to  ask 
the  witness  whether,  at  any  time  before  the 
convention,  he  had  ever  heard  from  the 
prisoner  what  his  objects  were,  and  whether 
he  had  at  all  mixed  himself  up  in  the  busi 
ness.  80  in  Home  Tooke's  case,  the  prison 
er's  counsel  was  permitted  to  introduce 
book,  written  before  the  time  of  the  alleged 
oftcnse,  to  prove  his  fealty  to  the  King,  and 
that  his  design  was  not  to  overturn  the 
Government.  True,  Lord  Ellenborough 
doubts  the  soundness  of  this  decision;  but 
his  is  the  opinion  only  of  one  judge,  while 
the  other  judges  concurred  against  him. 


This  decision  stands  in  the  light  of  as 
good  authority  as  if  it  had  not  been  ques 
tioned.  It  can  not  overturn  the  decision 
of  the  whole  Court. 

If,  in  the  case  of  Home  Tooke,  a  book 
written  before  the  time  of  the  conspiracy, 
could  be  introduced  to  show  the  loyalty  of 
the  prisoner  to  his  King,  with  how  much 
stronger  reason  may  we  press  our  claim  to  be 
permitted  to  introduce  evidence  about  the 
time  of  the  election  of  Mr.  Humphreys  as 
Major  General,  to  show  that  he  then  re 
pudiated  the  whole  scheme.  The  point 
seems  to  me  to  be  too  clear  for  argument, 
that  justice  requires  that  the  accused  be 
allowed  to  introduce  counter-statements, 
occurring  during  the  period  of  his  alleged 
connection  with  the  order,  to  rebut  the 
hearsay  evidence  introduced  against  him 
by  the  Government.  This  necessity  in 
volves  the  introduction  of  conversations 
and  acts,  running  through  the  whole  period 
from  September,  1863,  to  his  arrest  in  1864. 
This  is  necessary  to  show,  in  the  light  of  all 
his  declarations  and  acts,  what  his  whole 
conduct  has  been.  It  is  due  to  every  man's 
individual  acts,  that  they  should  be  con 
strued  by  all  his  surrounding  acts  which 
have  reference  to  the  same  transactions. 
This  is  allowed  to  the  defense.  The  general 
character  of  the  accused  for  loyalty  and  de 
votion  to  his  country  is  needed  as  a  rebutter 
to  the  charge  of  conspiracy  or  treason,  when 
the  evidence  on  which  that  depends  is 
doubtful.  This  rule  we  apply  to  the  pres 
ent  case.  It  is  evident  that  Mr.  Humphreys 
had  no  connection  with  the  order  at  the 
time  this  conspiracy  was  planned.  We 
show  that  as  soon  as  he  was  elected,  he  re 
pudiated  the  office  of  Major  General ;  and 
that  in  every  step  of  his  life  since  he  joined 
the  order,  he  has  acted  the  part  of  a  good 
citizen.  We  shall  show  that,  in  the  case  of 
the  men  pursuing  the  soldiers  near  Cale 
donia,  he  overtook  them  and  called  them 
back  from  their  pursuit,  and  reminded  them 
of  their  duties  as  good  citizens.  If,  in  some 
degree,  he  identified  himself  with  the  mob, 
and  went  half-way  with  them,  or  assumed 
to  be  of  them,  to  get  influence  over  them,  it 
can  not  be  an  evidence  of  his  guilt,  but  of  that 
tact  which  is  necessary  to  the  performance 
of  his  duties  as  a  citizen.  We  will  go  through 
his  whole  life,  if  need  be,  and  show  that.he 
had  been  devoted  to  the  laws,  constitution, 
and  peace  of  his  country,  and  opposed  to 
every  thing  which  would  tend  to  the  sub 
version  of  the  Government. 

The  charge  in  this  case  is  that  of  con- 
a  spiracy,  and  it  extends  as  far  back  as  the 
meeting  at  Terre  Haute,  in  July  or  August, 
1863,  up  to  the  time  when  these  conspira 
tors  were  arrested.  I  believe  there  is  evi 
dence  tending  to  fix  guilt  on  these  conspir 
ators,  even  after  their  arrest.  It  is  charged 
that  from  July  or  August,  1863,  until  Sep 
tember  or  October,  1864,  this  conspiracy  was 


160 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


maturing,  and  its  members  ripening  trea 
sonable  schemes  to  overturn  the  Govern 
ment.  To  prove  these  charges,  the  Judge 
Advocate  introduces  evidence  to  show  what 
each  one  has  done  or  intended  to  do,  dur 
ing  this  time,  in  the  prosecution  of  this 
crime.  The  evidence  consists  of  the  dec 
larations  and  acts  of  the  several  conspira 
tors,  what  they  have  said  and  done,  and 
that  their  design  and  purpose  was  to  over 
turn  the  Government.  All  this  forms  a 
part  of  the  res  gestce  of  the  transaction,  of 
the  crime  with  which  they  are  charged.  In 
the  case  of  any  particular  act  of  crime,  we 
prove  the  act  and  the  circumstances  con 
nected  with  it  as  the  res  gestaz,  as  confined 
to  that  particular  time.  But  this  is  a  con 
tinuous  act,  universal,  and  involving,  in  its 
meshes  for  ruin,  all  these  men.  If  this 
order  is,  per  se,  a  conspiracy,  these  acts  are 
part  of  this  constant  act,  and  if  they  are 
arraigned  before  this  Commission,  their  ad 
missions,  in  justice,  should  be  introduced  in 
their  own  defense.  I  am  willing  that  every 
fiber  shall  be  woven,  in  the  web  of  testi 
mony,  of  the  acts  of  each  one  as  against 
them  all,  if  the  connection  be  established 
between  these  men,  and  I  am  willing  that 
the  men  who  are  connected  thus,  shall  go 
with  that  man  who  is  connected  with  the 
treasonable  effort.  But  let  us  not  attempt  to 
entangle,  in  this  terrible  drag-net,  a  man 
who  is  not  guilty,  who  never  concurred  in 
their  treason,  but  repudiated  the  act  which 
would  have  brought  him  to  ruin.  Let  him 
have  the  benefit  of  his  acts  from  the  first 
until  now.  It  is  not  proven  that  he  had 
any  other  connection  with  the  order,  than 
that  he  was  elected  Major  General.  There 
is  no  evidence  that  he  had  attached  himself 
to  the  order  until  then,  and  that  is  only  an 
inference.  If  he  was  not  a  member,  it  is 
due  to  him  that  he  should  explain  that 
matter  by  his  own  declarations,  made  at 
the  time  he  learned  that  he  was  elected. 
That  if  he  knew  nothing  of  the  military 
part  of  the  order,  it  is  proper  that  he  should 
prove  his  repudiation  of  it  at  that  time. 

What  would  Mr.  Bingham  have  thought, 
who,  having  been  told  that  there  was  noth 
ing  in  the  order  incompatible  with  the  du 
ties  of  a  good  citizen,  had  he  been  elected  a 
Major  General  and  assigned  to  the  com 
mand  of  a  district  of  the  State?  And  sup 
pose,  when  they  elected  Humphreys,  they 
had  pointed  out  his  duties  and  given  him 
the  ulterior  purposes  of  the  organization, 
namely,  to  establish  a  North-western  Con 
federacy,  or  that  failing,  to  attach  them 
selves  to  the  treasonable  Confederacy  of 
the  South?  Suppose  all  that  had  been  ex 
plained  to  him,  would  he  have  no  right  to 
go  forward  and  show  why  he  eschewed  the 
office,  and  any  relations  to  such  an  organi 
zation  as  this?  If  he  has  no  such  right,  he 
has  no  defense  at  all.  The  worst  enemy  he 
has  in  the  world  may  bind  him  hand  and 


foot,  and  deliver  him  over  for  trial,  to  be 
doomed  to  a  dishonorable  death.  I  can 
not  think  the  laws  justify  such  a  construc 
tion,  or  that  this  Corn-mission  will  deter 
mine  this  point  in  such  a  manner,  and  I 
submit  the  point  for  their  decision. 

The  Judge  Advocate,  in  reply,  said: 

I  desire  to  direct  the  attention  of  the 
Court  to  a  few  points,  not  because  I  deem 
the  question  at  issue  of  so  much  importance 
to  the  Government,  but  because  it  may 
settle  the  rule  of  examination  to  be  pursued 
in  this  case.  At  the  same  time,  I  believe  if 
it  should  be  decided  against  the  Govern 
ment,  it  would  work  great  injustice.  The 
gentleman's  own  law  is  all  I  ask  to  decide 
the  case  against  him.  The  authority  from 
which  he  quoted,  says: 

"  As  in  trials  for  conspiracies,  whatever 
the  prisoner  may  have  done  or  said  at  any 
meeting  alleged  to  be  held  in  pursuance  of 
the  conspiracy,  is  admissible  in  evidence  on 
the  part  of  the  prosecution  against  him; 
so,  on  the  other  hand,  any  other  part  of 
his  conduct,  at  the  same  meetings,  will  be 
allowed  to  be  proven  on  his  behalf;  for  the 
intention  and  design  of  a  party  at  a  partic 
ular  time,  are  best  explained  by  a  complete 
view  of  every  part  of  his  conduct  at  that 
time,  and  not  merely  from  the  proof  of  a 
single  and  insulated  act  or  declaration." 
JRoscoes  Criminal  Evidence,  page  88. 

Had  the  counsel  for  the  accused  read  a 
little  further,  he  would  have  found  the  de 
cision  he  quoted  overruled.  Roscoe  adds: 
The  soundness  of  this  decision  has  been 
doubted  by  Lord  Ellenborough,  who  said,  if 
the  point  should  ever  occur  before  him,  it 
would  become  his  duty  seriously  to  consider 
whether  such  evidence  should  be  admitted. 
Lamberts  case,  2  Comp.,  409.  In  the  follow 
ing  case,  a  stricter  limit  was  placed  to  the 
investigation  of  the  acts  and  declarations 
of  a  prisoner.  On  the  trial  of  Lord  George 
Gordon,  a  witness  was  asked  by  his  counsel 
on  cross-examination,  as  to  a  statement 
made  by  the  prisoner  on  the  night  before  tlie. 
meeting  in  St.  George's  Fields,  and  with  re 
spect  to  which  such  evidence  had  been 
produced.  The  question  was  overruled, 
and  Lord  Mansfield  said,  that  as  the  coun 
sel  for  the  crown  had  given  evidence  of 
what  the  prisoner  said  at  the  meeting  on 
the  29th  of  May,  the  counsel  for  the  pris 
oner  might  show  the  whole  connection  of 
what  the  prisoner  said,  besides,  at  that  meet 
ing,  but  that  they  could  not  go  into  evi 
dence  of  what  he  said  on  an  antecedent  day. 
21  Hoiv.  St.  Tr.,  542." 

This  decision  was  reaffirmed  in  a  subse 
quent  case  to  that  of  Home  TooTce,  overrul 
ing  the  decision  in  that  case,  as  will  be  seen 
from  the  closing  sentence  of  the  paragraph 
just  quoted: 

"So  in  Hansons  case,  on  the  charge  of 
promoting  a  riot,  the  prisoner's  counsel  was 
not  allowed  to  prove  what  he  said  privately 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


161 


to  a  friend,  previously  to  his  going  to  the 
place  of  riot,  respecting  his  motives  in  going 
thither.  31  How.  St.  TV.,  1281." 

That  is  the  most  recent  decision.  But, 
the  rule,  even  as  given  by  the  gentleman, 
does  not  go  to  the  extent  he  claims.  On 
the  other  hand,  1  claim  for  the  Government 
that  if  the  alleged  conspiracy  had  been  in 
augurated  on  the  first  day  of  August,  I 
could,  on  the  part  of  the  Government,  go 
back  a  few  days  or  months,  and  introduce 
acts  of  the  accused  to  show  the  intentions 
and  purposes  of  the  act,  before  the  1st  of 
August.  At  the  same  time,  the  accused 
can  go  back,  and  show  that  the  tenor  of 
his  life  had  been  against  his  entering  upon 
any  such  project ;  but  they  can  not  go  back 
and  prove  distinct  counter  statements  on 
the  part  of  the  defendant.  If  we  examine 
the  argument  of  the  gentleman,  its  fallacy, 
I  think,  will  be  apparent.  lie  asks,  shall 
this  defendant  be  bound  by  what  transpired 
in  his  absence?  lie  says  that  he  should 
not.  I  say  that  he  shall;  and  thus  saith 
the  law.  When  any  man  takes  upon  him 
self  the  obligations  of  the  Order  of  Ameri 
can  Knights,  or  Sons  of  Liberty,  he  takes 
upon  himself  the  responsibility  for  tbe  acts 
of  that  body,  whether  he  be  absent  or 
present. 

From  the  time  a  man  takes  the  oaths  of 
this  conspiracy,  he  takes  upon  himself  re 
sponsibility  for  the  acts  of  the  entire  or 
ganization,  he  agrees  to  stand  by  the  illegal 
and  treasonable  acts  of  every  member  of 
the  organization.  So  says  the  law.  I  pro 
pose  to  connect  these  men  not  only  with 
what  was  done  in  their  presence,  but  in 
their  absence,  and  hold  them  accountable. 
The  law  says  that  when  there  is  a  con 
spiracy  formed,  and  men  league  themselves 
together,  that  they  may  have  greater  power 
to  accomplish  their  evil  purposes,  they 
shall  be  held  to  a  greater  responsibility, 
and  all  those  who  perform  any  part,  how 
ever  minute,  or  however  remote  from  the 
scene  of  action,  but  who  are  actually 
leagued  in  tho  general  conspiracy,  are  to  be 
considered  as  aiders  and  abettors  in  the  same. 

The  accused  argue  that  this  association 
is  not  per  se  a  conspiracy,  and  that  the 
Judge  Advocate  has  assumed  this  point; 
that  as  yet  it  is  an  open  question  before 
the  Court,  and  until  it  is  settled,  the  argu 
ment  of  the  Judge  Advocate  is  not  pertin 
ent,  and  that  it  can  not  be  settled  until 
the  close,  of  the  case.  All  the  evidence  in 
troduced  would  never  have  been  permit 
ted  by  the  accused  to  come  in,  but  on  the 
ground  that  the  Government  had  proven 
the  organization  a  conspiracy  per  se.  If  not 
a  conspiracy  per  se,  then  the  declarations  of 
other  members  as  co-conspirators  could  not 
be  introduced  against  any  one  of  the  ac 
cused.  Almost  every  witness  we  have  put 
on  the  stand  on  the  part  of  the  Govern 
ment  C9uld  have  had  his  mouth  closed  by 


the  able  counsel  for  the  accused,  on  any 
other  foundation  than  that  the  order  was 
a  conspiracy  per  se.  They  are  not  the  able 
counsel  that  I  take  them  to  be  if  they  per 
mit  their  clients  to  be  convicted  on  defec 
tive  and  irrelevant  testimony.  We  have 
examined  the  witnesses  on  the  hypothesis 
that  it  was  a  conspiracy  in  itself.  Except 
on  that  hypothesis,  we  could  not  have 
proven  a  single  act  or  statement  of  Dodd, 
or  Walker,  or  Wright,  or  any  member  of 
the  order,  except  the  accused.  The  ques 
tion  has  been  put  to  nearly  every  witness, 
"Is  this  man  a  member  of  the  order?"  If 
so,  there  was  no  objection  to  the  admission 
of  any  one  of  his  statements  or  acts. 

Is  it  a  conspiracy  within  the  meaning  of 
the  law,  an  agreement  to  do  a  legal  thing 
in  an  illegal  manner,  or  to  do  an  illegal 
thing  in  a  legal  manner?  Is  this  not  a  con 
spiracy  where  men  bind  themselves  with 
oaths — the  penalty  for  the  violation  of  these 
oaths  being  death — oaths  violative  of  all 
laws,  and  peace  and  order — bind  themselves 
to  execute  without  hesitation  the  com 
mands  of  their  officers  in  the  order,  and 
agree  that  the  National  Government  is  only 
a  compact  to  be  dissolved  at  pleasure?  Is 
that  order  a  conspiracy  the  members  of 
which  pledge  themselves  to  form  a  North 
western  Confederacy,  and  failing  in  that  to 
attach  themselves  to  the  Southern  Confed 
eracy  ;  where  they  plot  the  release  of  the 
enemies  of  the  Government,  the  seizure  of 
arsenals,  the  capture  of  State  officers,  the 
subversion  of  State  Governments,  and  the 
destruction  of  the  lives  and  property  of 
the  citizens  of  the  States  where  those  men 
reside?  Is  not  all  this  a  combination 
and  agreement  to  do  an  illegal  act?  The 
accused  argue  that  they  do  not  defer  d  the 
acts  referred  to,  but  that  the  civil  part  of 
the  order  was  purely  political;  and  that  the 
military  purposes  of  the  order  were  con 
fined  to  the  military  part  of  it,  and  that 
those  who  belonged  to  that  part  of  the  or 
ganization  are  alone  responsible  for  it. 
They  can  not  separate  the  parts  of  the 
order,  each  belonged  to  the  other,  and  all 
those  in  the  civil  portion  were  bound 
by  their  oaths  to  obey  the  military  chiefs. 
It  was  only  on  the  hypothesis  that  the  or 
der  was  illegal  as  a  means  and  an  end,  that 
we  could  introduce  proof  of  the  acts  and 
admissions  of  its  members.  Benet,  page 
291,  says: 

"The  acts  and  declarations  of  other  con 
spirators,  in  the  absence  of  the  prisoner, 
are  admissible  against  him;  and  the  pris 
oner  may  be  affected  by  writings  from 
other  persons  which  come  into  his  custody 
before  his  apprehension.  In  these  cases 
the  evidence  is  of  a  direct  nature,  applying 
to  the  acts  in  furtherance  of  a  conspiracy, 
and  not  circumstantial,  as  proving  only 
collateral  circumstances  from  which  these 
acts  are  to  be  inferred." 


162 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


Let  me  explain  this  rule  of  law,  which 
works  no  injustice  to  the  accused.  On  the 
part  of  the  Government.  I  may  show  that 
the  order  is  a  conspiracy,  and  that  the 
accused  is  a  member  of  it;  and  then  prove 
the  acts  of  the  body  or  of  any  member 
of  it,  in  pursuance  of  the  general  purposes 
of  the  order.  The  accused  can  not  go 
into  isolated  facts  to  show  that  he  is  not 
connected  with  its  purposes.  For  instance, 
if  I  prove  that  he  was  consulted  at  a  cer 
tain  meeting  of  the  order  about  breaking 
up  the  Government,  and  made  attempts  to 
arm  the  members,  they  can  not  rebut  it 
by  showing  that  at  other  meetings  of  the 
order,  or  at  other  times  and  places,  he  said 
things  in  favor  of  the  Government.  They 
attempt  to  disprove  a  bad  act  by  proving  a 
good  one.  If  I  indict  a  man  for  horse- 
stealing,  he  can  not  rebut  that  crime  by 
proving  that  he  has  restored  to  their  owners 
horses  stolen  by  others.  The  transactions 
of  this  order  are  made  up  of  separate  acts, 
which  I  prove  as  parts  of  a  whole.  The 
accused  can  rebut  or  explain  what  I  have 
undertaken  to  prove  took  place  at  these 
meetings.  They  say  that  Humphreys  re 
pudiated  this  office.  They  must  prove  this 
by  showing  that  he  repudiated  it  to  the 
source  from  which  it  came.  What  he  said 
to  this  or  that  man,  or  to  a  hundred  men, 
about  repudiating  that  office,  is  not  suffi 
cient  proof.  The  appointment  came  from 
the  Grand  Council,  and  the  official  notifica 
tion  would  be  given  by  the  Grand  Com 
mander  or  Grand  Secretary.  If  he  wrote 
to  them  repudiating  the  office,  the  produc 
tion  of  the  letter  would  prove  that  fact. 
Or,  if  the  letter  could  not  be  produced,  if 
it  was  lost,  he  could  prove  the  fact,  and 
prove  by  the  parties  who  received  it  what 
the  contents  of  the  letter  were.  But  he 
can  not  prove  his  repudiation  of  the  office 
by  what  he  has  said  to  other  and  outside 
parties.  It  has  been  proved  that  Hum 
phreys  was  willing  to  accept  a  Brigadier 
Generalship  and  stay  in  the  rear.  "They 
have  the  right  to  prove  that  his  command 
was  not  of  that  character.  That  fact  does 
not  show  that  he  was  a  Brigadier  General; 
but  shows  that  he  was  so  connected  with  the 
order,  that  he  had  its  confidence,  and  espe 
cially  does  it  connect  him  with  the  military 
part  of  the  order.  If  they  prove  that  no 
such  conversation, took  place,  and  no  such 
thing  was  stated,  or  that  there  was  no  com 
munication  on  that  point,  they  destroy  the 
evidence  adduced  on  this  point.  The  ques 
tion  is  whether  the  order  undertook  to 
make  him  a  Brigadier  General. 

We  also  prove  that  he  was  with  a  body 
of  mon  at  a  certain  time,  who  were  en 
gaged  in  an  illegal  act.  Let  the  accused 
show  why  he  was  there.  If  they  prove 
that  he  was  at  the  meeting  for  legal  pur 
poses,  they  have  the  benefit  of  it.  We 
prove  that  he  was  at  a  meeting  addressed 


by  an  avowed  rebel.  Let  them  prove  that 
he  was  not  a  rebel,  and  that  he  made  no 
such  speech  as  is  attributed  to  him.  His 
acts  at  these  times  and  places  show  the 
character  of  the  transaction.  But' he  can 
not  disprove  bad  acts  and  speeches,  by  prov 
ing  good  ones  at  other  times  and  places. 

'fhe  law  of  conspiracy  is  clear,  that  its 
members  are  bound  by  the  acts  of  co-con 
spirators.  Whatever  Walker  or  Dodd  did 
at  Chicago,  or  here,  in  pursuance  of  the 
purposes  of  the  order,  binds  Humphreys, 
just  as  though  they  were  proven  as  acts  of 
Humphreys.  Because  he  is  an  arm,  and 
Dodd  the  head  in  the  conspiracy,  it  is  no 
defense  for  him  to  say  he  is  not  the  head. 

The  accused  have  attempted  to  make  a 
distinction  between  the  Administration  and 
the  Government,  They  can  not  do  this. 
The  Administration  is  the  Government  de 
facto.  It  exists  in  three  branches — the  ex 
ecutive,  legislative  and  the  judicial  depart 
ments.  They  are  co-ordinate  parts  of  a 
whole,  and  he  who  arrays  himself  against 
any  one  of  these  departments  contrary  to 
law,  commits  treason.  And  when  any  body 
of  men  so  far  forget  themselves  as  to  do 
this,  they  must  be  taught  that  every  part 
of  this  Government  must  be  respected,  and 
can  only  be  set  aside  by  legal  means.  If 
men  plot  treason,  and  array  themselves 
with  the  enemies  of  the  Government,  when 
it  is  struggling  for  its  very  existence,  they 
must  feel  the  powrer  of  that  Government, 
and  meet  the  fate  that  conspirators  and 
traitors  so  richly  deserve. 

The  court  room  was  then  cleared  for  de 
liberation. 

On  reopening  the  court  room,  the  Judge 
Advocate  announced  to  the  accused  that 
the  objection  was  sustained. 

Mr.  Humphreys,  on  receiving  information 
of  his  appointment,  rejected  it. 

I  remember  the  time  of  the  excitement 
at  Caledonia,  in  Sullivan  county.  I  over 
took  Mr.  Humphreys  on  the  road,  as  he  was 
going  there;  he  said  that  his  purpose  in 
going  there  was  to  put  down  the  disturb 
ance  and  quell  the  riot,  and  that  he  had 
sent  on  a  couple  of  men  to  have  the  thing 
stopped;  Mr.  Snow  was  the  name  of  one  of 
these  men,  the  name  of  the  other  I  have 
forgotten.  The  men  who  had  arms  were 
stopped  by  Mr.  Humphreys  at  Caledonia. 
Mr.  Humphreys  made  a  speech  of  consid 
erable  length,  "urging  them  to  return  home, 
and  saying  he  did  not  think  the  soldiers 
intended  to  do  any  thing  wrong — that  he 
could  not  think  for  a  moment  that  the 
Government  had  sent  sold;ers  to  trespass 
upon  the  rights  of  citizens.  They  had  taken 
a  horse  or  two  from  Mr.  Wagner,  and  an 
other  from  the  widow  McBride,  and  a  bridle 
and  paddle  from  Mr.  Pigg;  they  took  his 
son  out  through  the  pasture  to  make  him 
hunt  horses.  The  report  was,  that  Mr.  Pigg 
had  been  shot  at,  and  from  the  appearance 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


163 


of  his  hat,  I  should  judge  he  had  been,  j  ticular  traits  of  character,  as  in  a  trial  on 
Mr.  Humphreys,  in  his  speech,  advised  the !  a  charge  of  cowardice,  he  can  prove  partic- 
people  to  go  home  and  behave  themselves;  lular  acts  of  personal  bravery  to  rebut  the 
he  knew  that  the  Government  would  not !  charge.  It  is  not  permitted  to  prove  by  a 


send  soldiers  to  harass  them;  he  said  the 
soldiers  had  made  ample  satisfaction,  and 
restored  the  horses  to  Mr.  Wagner;  this 
was  four  and  a  half  miles  from  Sullivan. 
The  soldiers  had  gone  toward  Sullivan,  and 
the  disposition  of  the  crowd  was  to  go  after 
the  soldiers;  but  Mr.  Humphreys  said  that 
satisfaction  had  been  made  as  regarded  the 
horses,  and  it  was  best  to  be  peaceable  and 


witness  what  the  Commission  is  sitting  here 
to  determine. 

The  accused  replied : 

The  Judge  Advocate  admits  that  it  is  com 
petent  for  us  to  prove  general  moral  charac 
ter.  That  if  a  witness  questions  the  truth 
and  veracity  of  the  accused,  we  could  prove 
his  general  character  for  truth  and  veracity. 
If  he  were  charged  with  a  crime  involving 


go  home.     He  said  if  they  went  to  Sullivan  |  a  lack  of  chastity,  it  would  be  competent  to 


they  would  get  to  drinking,  and  get  in  a 

Humphreys 


with 
that 


the   soldiers.      Mr. 
Mr.   Cowgill  was  a 


Government 


row 
said 

officer,  and  must  be  heard,  and  he  made  a 
speech,  and  told  them  to  go  home.  Mr. 
Cowgill  said  he  could  indorse  Mr.  Humph 
reys'  speech.  I  don't  remember  that  poli 
tics  were  mentioned  in  Mr.  Humphreys' 
speech,  but  the  whole  tendency  of  it  was 
for  the  purpose  of  quieting  the  crowd.  I 
have  been  personally  acquainted  with  Mr. 
Freeman,  the  enrolling  officer,  for  four  or 
five  years  before  his  death;  we  lived  in 
the  same  township.  He  lived  in  Sulli 
van  county,  Cass  township,  and  Mr. 
Humphreys  lived  in  Green  county ;  I  think 
they  lived  about  ten  or  eleven  miles  from 
each  other. 

Q.  State  whether,  at  the  time  of  the  as 
sassination  of  Mr.  Freeman,  and  afterward, 
Mr.  Humphreys  did  not  denounce  the  kill 
ing  of  Mr.  Freeman,  as  a  cowardly  and 
base  act? 

Question  objected  to,  and  withdrawn. 

I  have  known  Mr.  Humphreys  very  inti 
mately;  we  boarded  and  roomed  together. 
I  do  not  know  that  Mr.  Humphreys  ever 
drilled  any  body  of  men;  I  do  not  think  he 
knows  any  thing  about  military  tactics. 

Q.  Are  you  acquainted  with  the  general 
character  of  Mr.  Humphreys  as  a  law-abid 
ing,  peaceable  man,  devoted  to  the  main 
tenance  of  the  laws  and  Constitution,  and 
the  union  of  his  countiy  ? 

Question  objected  to,  and  withdrawn. 

Q.  Are  you  acquainted  with  the  general 
character  of  Mr.  Humphreys? 

A.  His  general  character,  I  think,  is 
good. 

Q.  Are  you  acquainted  with  his  general 
character  as  a  peaceable,  law-abiding  man, 
devoted  to  the  conservation  of  the  laws,  the 
Constitution,  and  the  union  of  the  coun 
try? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate,  for  the  reason  that  it  is  a  leading  one, 
and  it  covers  the  very  points  which  this 
Commission  is  to  decide,  whether  or  not  the 
accused  is  a  law-abiding,  peaceful  citizen, 
devoted  to  the  laws  of  his  country.  He 
can  introduce  testimony  as  to  his  general 
moral  character.  In  some  cases,  before  mil 
itary  courts,  the  accused  can  prove  his  par- 


introduce  proof  of  his  general  character  for 
chastity.  If  he  were  arraigned  on  a  charge 
involving  violence,  brutal  assault,  or  mur 
der,  it  would  be  competent  to  introduce 
proof  that  his  general  character  was  that  of 
a  peaceable  man,  indisposed  to  quarrels  or 
to  participate  in  them.  The  charge  against 
the  accused  is  one  involving  his  disposition 
to  obey  the  laws  of  his  country,  and  it  is  on 
that  question  that  he  seeks  to  introduce 
proof.  He  has  the  right  to  show  his  gene 
ral  character  for  obedience  to  the  laws  and 
the  Constitution,  and  to  have  the  benefit  of 
that  evidence  on  this  trial. 

Questions  as  to  character  are  always  lead 
ing  ones.  The  witness  is  asked:  "Do  you 
know  what  his  general  moral  character  is  ?" 
If  so,  he  states  whether  it  is  good  or  bad. 
General  character  and  general  ^reputation 
I  consider  synonymous.  We,  in  like  man 
ner,  put  the  question  as  to  his  general  char 
acter  as  to  obedience  to  the  Constitution 
and  laws  of  his  country.  The  law  denies  us 
the  privilege  of  putting  other  than  a  leading 
question.  If  the  witness  states  that  he 
knows  what  that  character  is,  we  ask  him  is 
it  good  or  bad?  Surely  we  ought  not  to  be 
denied  the  right  to  put  that  question. 
That  is  conceded  in  principle  by  Dellart  in 
his  work  on  Military  Law.  I  quote  from 
page  344: 

"Theprisoner  is  allowed  to  call  witnesses  to 
prove  his  character,  but  then  it  must  be  un 
derstood  that  character  unconnected  with 
the  charge  can  not  be  admitted  as  evidence  to 
influence  the  finding  of  the  Court.  General 
character  thus  presented  for  the  notice  of 
the  Court,  may  be  of  advantage  by  modify 
ing  the  punishment  to  be  decreed  by  the 
Court,  or  presenting  the  case  to  the  review 
ing  authority  as  one  in  which  mercy  may  be 
exercised,  and  thus  procure  pardon  for  the 
offender,  of  mitigation  of  the  sentence." 

The  proof  must  be  connected  with  the 
charge.  One  reason  why  general  military 
character  is  allowed  to  be  introduced  is  be 
cause  it  embraces  all  the  specific  details 
which  make  up  that  character.  That  is  ex 
actly  in  point  to  the  present  case. 


I  read  still  further: 
'Courts-martial   will 


always   permit  the 


prisoner  to  present  evidence  of  character, 
and   do   not  require   that   it  should  bear 


164 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT  INDIAXAPOLIS. 


analogy,  and  have  reference  to  the  charge 
in  issue,  and  such  testimony,  when  the 
evidence  against  him  is  doubtful,  may 
be  sufficient  to  warrant  an  acquittal.  It 
must  be  apparent,  that  wherever  intention 
is  a  principal  ingredient  in  the  offense 
charged,  depending  too  upon  presumptive 
proof,  evidence  as  to  character  which  ap 
plies  directly  to  the  nature  of  the  accusa 
tion  may  be  exceedingly  important." 

In  this  case  intention  is  an  important  in 
gredient,  showing  how  and  why  as  a  loyal 
man  he  connected  himself  with  the  order. 
If  he  is  a  loyal  man,  always  obedient  to  his 
Government,  never  in  any  manner  inter 
fering  with  its  peace,  nor  attempting  to 
break  up  the  Union,  this  is  testimony  in  his 
favor,  which  should  be  admitted  in  his  favor 
to  rebut  the  doubtful  evidence  against  him. 

The  Judge  Advocate  replied: 

It  will  save  the  time  of  the  Court  to  settle 
these  preliminary  questions  now.  1  admit 
most  certainly,  as  the  gentleman  knows, 
that  you  can  inquire  as  to  the  general  char 
acter  of  a  person  accused  of  certain  classes 
of  offenses.  In  this  case  the  character  of 
the  accused  is  made  up  of  his  acts,  they 
have  a  right  to  prove  that  his  acts  alleged 
to  be  disloyal  were  not  so,  but  they  can  not 
settle  the  question  of  character  by  putting 
the  leading  and  affirmative  question  whether 
he  is  devoted  to  the  Constitution,  laws  and 
Union  of  his  country.  They  go  too  far 
when  they  attempt  that.  When  they 
attempt  to  prove  his  devotion  to  the  laws 
and  Constitution,  they  go  beyond  the  bounds 
allowed  as  to  general  character.  If  they  wish 
to  present  it  as  a  matter  to  secure  mitiga 
tion  of  the  sentence,  I  may  allow  its  intro 
duction. 

I  will,  however,  waive  the  objection  for 
the  present,  and  allow  the  question  to  be 
put  to  the  witness. 

I  do  know  the  general  character  of  Mr. 
Humphreys  as  a  peaceable,  law-abiding 
man,  devoted  to  the  conservation  of  the 
laws  and  Constitution,  and  the  Union  of  his 
country ;  and  that  general  character  is 
good. 

Q.  State  whether  or  not  the  general  char 
acter  of  Mr.  Humphreys,  during  the  period 
of  time  since  the  war  broke  out,  has  not 
been  that  of  a  peacemaker,  and  in  favor  of 
the  enforcement  of  the  laws. 

Question  objected  to. 

The  accused  stated  that  if  the  objection 
was  insisted  on  he  should  be  obliged  to  go 
into  the  detail  of  the  times,  and  show  by 
what  sort  of  population  Mr.  Humphreys  had 
been  surrounded.  He  wished  to  prove  his 
acts  right  along  through  this  period  re 
ferred  to,  by  men  who  were  always  politic 
ally  opposed  to  him. 

The  Judge  Advocate  replied: 
Then  it  must  be  proved  by  acts  and  noi 
by  opinions — "What  have  been  his  acts  as 
a  general  peacemaker,  and  what  has  been 


lis  uniform  conduct  in  regard  to  keeping 
he  country  quiet." 

The  question  was  withdrawn. 

Question.  What  have  been  his  acts  as  a 
)eacemaker  from  the  inauguration  of  the 
^resent  rebellion  to  the  time  he  was  arrested? 

Question  objected  to,  and  withdrawn. 

Q.  What  have  been  his  acts  from  the 
commencement  of  the  organization  of  the 
order  at  Terre  Haute,  until  his  arrest? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate  on  the  ground  that  the  question  must 
j  confined  to  specific  acts. 

The  question  was  withdrawn. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  to  have  been  at  any 
meeting  where  Mr.  Humphreys  addressed 
the  people,  besides  the  one  you  have 
spoken  of? 

A.  I  attended  some  two  or  three  a  year 
ago. »  One  was  at  Linton;  and  he  made  two 
or  three  speeches,  at  which  I  was  present, 
from  the  start  of  the  organization  until  the 
time  of  his  arrest.  He  always  advised 
obedience  to  the  Government  and  the 
laws,  or  words  to  that  effect,  and  every 
thing  that  had  not  the  semblance  of  law 
about  it,  he  would  not  advise  obedience  to, 
no  matter  what  it  was. 

Q.  Do  you  know  any  thing  about  his  sen 
timents  as  to  the  action  of  his  friends  at 
the  time  of  his  arrest? 

Question  objected  to,  and  withdrawn. 

A.  Before  Mr.  Humphreys  was  arrested,  it 
was  frequently  talked  about  by  us. 

Q.  When  he  received  this  report,  what 
course  of  conduct  did  he  advise  his  friends 
to  take  ? 

Question  objected  to,  and  withdrawn. 

Q.  State  what  you  know,  if  any  thing, 
about  Mr.  Humphreys  having  incurred  the 
displeasure  of  his  party  friends,  because  he 
insisted  on  obedience  to  the  laws  and  the 
draft  ? 

Question  objected  to,  and  withdrawn. 

Q.  State  what  you  know,  if  any  thing, 
about  Mr.  Humphreys  having  repudiated 
Dodd  and  his  schemes  ? 

The  Judge  Advocate  objected  to  the 
question  because  it  was  not  confined  to  a 
particular  time. 

Q.  State  what  you  know  of  Mr.  Hum 
phreys'  repudiation  of  Dodd  and  his  schemes 
during  last  summer? 

Question  objected  to,  and  withdrawn. 

Q.  State  what  you  know  on  that  point 
during  his  connection  with  the  order? 

Question  objected  to,  and  withdrawn. 

Q.  State  whether,  from  the  16th  of  last 
February  up  to  the  time  of  his  arrest,  Mr. 
Humphreys  did  not  repudiate  any  public 
and  private  scheme  of  Mr.  Dodd? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate. 

The  court  room  was  then  cleared  for  de 
liberation.  On  being  reopened,  the  Judge 
.Advocate  announced  to  the  accused  that 
the  objection  was  sustained. 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


165 


After  I  returned  home  from  Indianapolis, 
I  went  to  Mr.  Humphreys  and  talked  with 
him  about  the  order.  He  then  went  to 
the  secretary  of  the  temple,  got  the  papers 
and  destroyed  them.  He  said  he  had  not 
understood  before  that  it  was  a  military 
organization ;  and  as  soon  as  he  learned 
what  were  the  purposes  of  the  military  or 
ganization,  h&  said  he  would  have  nothing 
more  to  do  with  it.  That  was  shortly  after 
his  appointment  as  Major  General.  Mr. 
Gray,  who  had  the  papers,  was  the  secre- 


of  the  Major  Generals.  I  understood  at  the 
February  meeting,  that  the  State  was  di 
vided  into  three  or  four  districts,  and  a 
Major  General  was  appointed  for  each  dis 
trict,  and  their  commands,  I  supposed,  were 
to  consist  of  the  members  of  the  Order  of 
American  Knights ;  I  knew  nothing  of  the 
change  of  th.e  name  of  the  order  to  the 
Sons  of  Liberty.  I  do  not  know  positively 
whether  Mr.  Humphreys  was  at  home  on 
the  14th  of  June;  the  books  do  not  show 
any  handwriting  made  by  him  on  that  day. 


tary  of  the  township  temple.     I  received  i  though  he  is  in  the  habit  of  making  en- 


my  first  degree  at  our  township  temple; 
the  second  degree  I  took  in  this  city,  in 
February,  after  which  I  returned  home  and 
informed  Mr.  Humphreys  of  his  appoint 
ment  as  Major  General.  I  never  met  with 
any  temple  after  that,  nor  to  my  knowl 
edge  has  Mr.  Humphreys.  I  believe  I  saw 
Mr.  Humphreys  in  about  ten  days  after  I 
returned  home  from  this  city;  and  the 
papers  must  have  been  destroyed  by  him  in 
March;  they  were  destroyed  in  our  store; 
I  saw  him  tear  them  up.  I  do  not  know 
what  papers  they  were,  for  I  did  not  read 
them;  Mr.  Humphreys,  Gray  and  myself, 
were  at  that  time  partners.  In  reference 
to  that  meeting  of  armed  citizens,  Mr. 
Humphreys  said  they  had  sent  for  him;  he 
went,  and  advised  them  to  go  home  and  be 
peaceable;  that  the  soldiers  did  not  mean 
to  harm  them.  I  have  heard  that  the  horse 
that  was  taken  by  the  soldiers,  was  taken 
to  carry  a  sick  soldier  a  few  miles,  and  that 


tries.  I  know  he  was  at  home  on  the  13th. 
I  never  saw  any  members  of  the  organiza 
tion  drill  with  or  without  arms.  No  assess 
ment  on  our  lodge  was  made,  that  I  know 
of,  for  the  purchase  of  arms,  or  for  any 
other  purpose. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

It  was  stated  at  the  February  meeting  of 
the  order,  held  in  this  city,  that  the  object 
of  the  order  was  the  more  perfect  organi 
zation  of  the  Democratic  party,  the  estab 
lishment  of  a  newspaper,  and  the  distribu 
tion  of  campaign  documents,  etc.;  I  am 
not  aware  that  it  had  any  other  than  a 
political  object,  except  the  appointment 
of  these  officers ;  and  I  did  not  know  the 
purpose  for  which  those  appointments  were 
made.  I  heard  Mr.  Humphreys  say  at 
Linton,  that  we  ought  to  obey  the  laws  as 
long  as  they  were  laws,  no  matter  how 
oppressive  they  might  be,  and  that  good 
citizens  would  do  so;  that  we  must  bear 


it  was  so  stated,  and  would  be  returned.     I  |with  them  unt}1  we   nad  a  change   in  the 
nolipvp  t,n<>  horsps  t,nn,t  wprp  t.akp.n.  woro.  n,II      *  j •    •  A....L-    _       TM  ..    i__  ..   T_..J.     . 


believe  the  horses  that  were  taken,  were  all 
returned.  Mr.  Humphreys  might  have  been 
armed,  as  he  generally  carried  a  revolver. 
I  did  not  hear  any  threats  made  against 
Mr.  Cowgill  at  that  meeting;  the  people  list 
ened  to  Mr.  Cowgill  while  he  was  speaking, 
and  heard  all  he  had  to  say.  The  crowd 
said  they  came  there  to  get  their  property 
from  the  soldiers.  I  did  not  hear  any 
threats  made  against  the  soldiers  or  the 
Government;  nor  did  I  hear  Mr.  Lincoln's 
name  mentioned.  Nor  did  I  hear  Mr. 
Humphreys  advise  the  people  to  go  home, 
but  not  to  sleep  too  soundly,  though  I  was 
there  all  the  time.  I  know  Mr.  Hum 
phreys  said  that  Mr.  Cowgill  had  been  ap 
pointed  by  the  Government,  and  that  he 
must  be  heard;  and  I  think  he  was  listened 
to  as  attentively  as  Mr.  Humphreys  was.  I 
have  heard  Mr.  Humphreys  during  the 
summer  say,  that  he  did  not  indorse  Mr. 
Lincoln's  policy  respecting  the  war,  and 
that  he  thought  the  policy  of  arming  the 
negroes  was  bad;  that  the  way  to  remedy  it 
was  to  beat  him  at  the  next  election.  I 


Administration.  The  last  entry  but  one 
made  in  our  books  on  the  13th  of  June, 
for  articles  sold,  is  in  the  handwriting  of 
Mr.  Humphreys.  It  is  sixteen  miles  from 
our  place  of  business  to  Sullivan,  the  near 
est  point  at  which  Mr.  Humphreys  could 
have  taken  the  cars  for  this  city;  and  had 
he  left  by  the  first  train,  he  would  not 
probably  have  been  here  till  7  o'clock  on 
the  evening  of  the  14th  of  June. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to 
meet  on  Friday,  November  18,  1864,  at  9 
o'clock,  A.  M. 

COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         ) 
November  18,  1864,  9  o'clock,  A.  M.  > 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  ad 
journment. 

All  the  members  present.  Also,  the 
Judge  Advocate,  the  accused  (except  W.  A. 
Bowles),  and  their  counsel. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

D.  O.  DAILEY,  a  witness  for  the  accused, 
was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly  sworn 
by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  follows: 


have  heard  him  say  it  was  the  duty  of  the  I  reside  in  Huntington,  Indiana,  and  am 
people  to  obey  the  laws.  I  never  heard  j  a  lawyer.  I  have  been  intimately  ac- 
any  thing  about  arming  members  of  the  quainted  with  Mr.  Milligan  eight  years; 


order,  till  I  heard  of  Dodd's  having  arms 
here ;  and  I  never  knew  any  thing  of  the 
military  organization  till  the  appointment 


and  during  the  greater  part  of  that  time 
have  practiced  at  the  same  bar ;  politically, 
I  am  not  a  sympathizer  with  Mr.  Milligan. 


166 


TREASON    TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


Q.  You  may  state  what  is  Mr.  Milligan's 
peculiar  characteristic  with  regard  to  the 
concealment  of  his  sentiments,  or  the  ex 
pression  of  them  openly  and  publicly,  with 
out  concealment. 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate  as  immaterial  and  irrelevant. 

The  Court  was  cleared  for  deliberation. 
On  being  reopened,  the  Judge  Advocate 
announced  to  the  accused  that  the  objec 
tion  was  sustained. 

I  am  acquainted  with  Mr.  Milligan's  char 
acter  in  the  neighborhood  in  which  he  lives, 
and  it  is  good.  His  general  character  as  a 
peaceable,  law-abiding  citizen,  is  good,  as 
far  as  1  understand  it.  During  the  last  year 
he  has  not  taken  an  active  part  in  politics, 
and  during  the  campaign  he  took  no  part 
at  all.  Mr.  Milligan,  as  a  citizen,  has  the 
reputation  of  being  a  straight-forward,  law- 
abiding  man;  as  a  lawyer,  1  think  him  very 
able;  as  a  politician,  I  do  not  think  he 
amounts  to  any  thing  at  all,  for  this  reason, 
that  he  takes  special  occasion  to  publish 
the  most  ultra  and  obnoxious  sentiments ; 
and  this  he  has  always  done,  as  far  as  my 
knowledge  extends.  Mr.  Milligan,  I  know, 
was  at  home  on  the  22d  of  February;  he 
was  there  when  T  went  awTay;  I  returned 
on  the  night  of  the  23d,  and  went  to 
Court  next  morning,  and  Mr.  Milligan  was 
there. 

On  the  20th  of  July,  I  know,  by  reference 
to  my  papers,  that  Mr.  Milligan  and  myself 
were  engaged  in  Iluntington,  in  the  case 
of  Ripley  vs.  Ripley,  before  the  Mayor. 

RICHARD  A.  CURREN,  a  witness  for  the  ac 
cused,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly 
sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as 
follows : 

My  residence  is  in  Iluntington;  I  am  a 
Presbyterian  minister,  belonging  to  that 
part  of  the  Presbyterian  body  generally 
denominated  old  school;  my  ecclesiastical 
connection,  presbyterially,  is  with  the  pres 
bytery  of  Fort  Wayne,  and  synodically  with 
the  presbytery  of  Northern  Indiana.  I  am 
acquainted  with  Mr.  Milligan;  I  have 
known  him  intimately  for  the  past  six 
years.  When  Mr.  Milligan  attends  minis 
terial  services  any-where,  he  generally  at 
tends  mine.  The  general  moral  character 
of  Mr.  Milligan  is  good.  I  am  acquainted 
with  his  general  reputation  as  a  peaceable, 
law-abiding  citizen,  devoted  to  the  Consti 
tution  and  the  institutions  of  our  country; 
and  that  reputation  is  generally  good. 

Q,  Have  you  any  means  of  knowing  Mr. 
Milligan's  private  or  particular  views  upon 
the  subject  of  revolution  in  this  State,  in 
the  North-west,  or  in  the  United  States? 

A.  I  have  on  several  occasions  had  con 
versations  with  Mr.  Milligan  on  that  sub 
ject. 

Q.  You  may  state  them. 

The  Judge  Advocate  objected  to  the 
question,  stating  his  objection  as  follows: 


It  is  perfectly  apparent  that  what  Mr. 
Milligan  might  have  said  in  outside  conver 
sations,  is  immaterial  to  this  Court.  It  is 
immaterial  and  illegitimate.  I  do  not  pro 
pose  to  argue  that  point.  The  Commission, 
I  think,  have  already  passed  upon  that 
question. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  replied: 
I  propose  to  limit  the  time  of  this  con 
versation  to  that  covered  by  the  alleged 
conspiracy.  We  claim  the  right  to  show 
that  the  purpose  Mr.  Milligan  had  in  view 
in  going  into  the  order,  was  to  control  and 
direct  it  so  that  it  should  do  no  mischief. 
If  his  declarations,  which  are  a  part  of  the 
res  gestcc,  are  not  admitted  in  evidence,  we 
can  not  show  his  real  purposes,  which  may 
have  been  laudable.  His  declarations  as  to 
his  purposes,  are  accompanying  facts,  and 
are,  we  contend,  competent  in  evidence. 
The  counsel  here  cited  De  Hart,  page.  354 
Then,  again,  in  the  case  cited  in  Hanson,  of 
The  Queen,  vs.  Lambert,  growing  out  of  the 
Chartist  case,  Lambert  was  allowed  to  in 
troduce  testimony  to  show  that  he  had 
made  speeches  in  favor  of  law  and  order. 

The  same  principle  is  admitted  in  the 
case  of  Rex  vs.  Whitehead,  \\th  English  Com 
mon  Law  Reports,  page  316.  Roscoe,  in  his 
work  on  Criminal  Evidence,  remarks  in  this 
case :  "  On  the  trial  of  an  indictment  for 
conspiracy  to  defraud,  the  written  corre 
spondence  of  the  defendant  with  another 
of  the  conspirators,  relating  to  the  transac 
tion  in  question,  was  allowed  to  be  read,  in 
order  to  show  that  the  defendant  was  de 
ceived  by  his  correspondent,  and  was  not  a 
participant  in  the  fraud."  Per  Best,  J.,  "I 
think  them  admissible,  for  what  the  parties 
say  at  the  time,  is  evidence  to  show  how 
they  acted;"  page  89.  The  same  author,  on 
page  22,  says:  u  Where  the  inquiry  is  into 
the  nature  and  character  of  a  certain  trans 
action,  not  only  what  was  done,  but  also 
what  was  said  by  both  parties,  during  the 
ontinuance  of  the  transaction,  is  admissi 
ble;  for  to  exclude  this,  would  be  to  ex 
clude  the  most  important  and  unexception 
able  evidence.  In  this  case,  it  is  not  the 
relation  of  third  persons  unconnected  with 
the  fact,  which  is  received,  but  the  declara 
tions  of  the  parties  to  the  facts  themselves, 
or  of  others  connected  with  them  in  the 
transactions,  which  are  admitted  for  the 
purpose  of  illustrating  its  peculiar  character 
and  circumstances.  Thus  it  has  been  held 
on  a  prosecution  for  high  treason,  that  the 
cry  of  the  mob  who  accompanied  the  pris 
oner,  may  be  received  in  evidence  as  part 
of  the  conversation." 

In  a  foot  note,  the  author  says: 
''Where  the  state  of  mind,  sentiment  or 
disposition  of  a  person  at  a  given  period  be 
come  pertinent  topics  of  inquiry,  his  dec 
larations  and  conversations,  being  part  of 
the  res  gestcr,  may  be  resorted  to.  Barthol- 
emy  vs.  The  People,  2  Hill,  248." 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


167 


These  decisions  apply  to  the  present  case. 
It  has  been  claimed  that  this  organization 
was  both  civil  and  military,  each  being  dis 
tinct.  It  is  proper  to  show  the  declarations  of 
the  accused,  in  order  to  show  to  which  branch 
of  the  organization  he  belonged.  If  he  ex 
pressed  contempt  for  the  office  of  Major 
General,  and  denounced  the  military  organ 
ization,  it  becomes  an  important  part  of  the 
res  gestce,  to  show  that  he  had  nothing  to  do 
with,  nor  any  sympathy  with,  the  ulterior 
purposes  of  this  organization.  It  certainly 
will  not  be  claimed  that  each  one  of  the 
eighteen  thousand  men  who  have  joined  this 
organization  is  responsible  for  the  acts  of 
Dodd  and  company. 

Page  24,  the  same  author  says: 

"  If  it  be  material  to  inquire  whether  a 
certain  person  gave  a  particular  order  on  a 
certain  day  what  he  has  said  or  written,  may 
be  evidence  of  the  order  (see  Jenkins  case,  I 
Lewin,  C-  G,  114);  or  where  it  is  material  to 
inquire  whether  a  certain  fact,  be  it  true  or 
false,  has  come  to  the  knowledge  of  a  third 
person,  what  he  has  said  or  written,  may  a,s 
clearly  show  his  knowledge,  as  what  he  has 
done." 

Russell  on  Crime,  2d  vol.,  page  779,  says  on 
the  same  point : 

"As  other  acts  and  declarations  of  the 
prisoner,  besides  those  charged  in  the  in 
dictment,  may  be  given  in  evidence  on  the 
part  of  the  prosecution,  so  he  himself  in  his 
defense  may,  in  some  cases,  prove  other  acts 
and  declarations  of  his  own,  as  evidence  of 
his  innocence.  Thus  on  a  charge  of  murder, 
expressions  of  good  will  and  acts  of  kind 
ness,  on  the  part  of  the  prisoner  toward  the 
deceased,  are  always  considered  important 
evidence,  as  showing  what  was  his  general 
disposition  toward  the  deceased,  from  which 
the  jury  may  be  led  to  conclude  that  his  in 
tention  could  not  have  been  what  the  charge 
imputes."  Also  the  case  of  Rex  vs.  Lambert, 
the  cases  of  Walker,  Hard;./,  Home  Tooke,  and 
Whilehead,  Russell,  pp.  779,  780. 

In  the  case  reported  in  l^th  Georgia  Re 
ports,  page  430,  Freeman  vs.  The  State,  on  a 
charge  of  taking  a  slave  from  his  master, 
the  defendant  was  permitted  to  introduce 
his  whole  declarations  while  carrying  oft' 
the  negro,  as  giving  character  to  the  act  itself. 

As  the  transactions  which,  it  is  alleged, 
the  prisoner  was  a  party  to,  were  each  for 
the  overthrow  of  the  Government,  it  is 
proper  to  introduce  the  declarations  of  the 
prisoner  as  part  of  the  res  gestcc,  aiid  as  show 
ing  his  intent. 

The  Judge  Advocate  replied: 

In  proving  a  case  against  the  accused,  we 
prove  his  acts;  and  the  only  reason  why 
his  words  are  permitted  to  be  proven  in  the 
<;ase,  is  that  they  tend  to  prove  what  his  acts 
have  been.  They  are  admissions  of  acts.  You 
can  prove  admissions  against  himself,  be 
cause  the  law  says  a  man  is  not  going  to 
make  admissions  against  his  own  interest. 


That  is  the  reason  why  his  words,  which  are 
admissions,  are  permitted  to  be  proved 
against  him.  But  you  can  not  prove  his 
declarations  which  are  in  his  own  favor,  be 
cause  it  is  maintained  to  be  constantly  giv 
ing  a  favorable  tinge  to  his  own  conduct. 
The  only  case,  in  which  the  declarations  of 
the  accused  in  his  favor  can  be  given,  is 
when  they  constitute  a  part  of  the  distinct 
act  charged,  and  are  a  part  of  the  re-s  gestcc. 
The  words  which  a  man  utters  while  doing 
an  act  can  be  proved,  because  they  are  in 
reality  a  part  of  the  acts.  The  Government 
proves  that  Humphreys  was  at  a  certain 
illegal  meeting.  He  proves  what  he  said  in 
going,  as  to  his  purposes  and  intentions  in 
going,  and  what  he  did,  and  I  do  not  object, 
because  it  is  part  of  the  act  itself.  The  de 
fense  can  not  introduce  any  declarations  ex 
cept  as  they  become  a  part  of  the  res  gestce. 
We  prove  particular  acts,  at  certain  times 
and  places,  months  intervening  between 
them.  The  accused  can  not  step  in  and 
prove,  that  between  these  times,  at  other 
places,  he  made  assertions  of  loyalty.  He 
can  not  thus  purge  himself  of  crime. 

And  further,  I  do  distinctly  assert,  that 
these  eighteen  thousand  members  of  the 
Order  of  American  Knights,  or  Sons  of  Lib 
erty,  are  all  of  them  parties  to  this  con 
spiracy,  and  held  responsible  for  what  Dodd 
and  others  did.  I  do  maintain  that  when 
they  joined  that  order  with  these  oaths, 
they  took  upon  themselves  the  responsibil 
ity  for  the  acts  of  every  member  who  took 
the  same  oaths.  They  can  prove  character, 
and  the  extent  of  their  knowledge  of  the 
bad  purpose  of  the  order,  only  in  mitigation 
of  their  sentence.  When  they  joined  an 
illegal  body  they  became  responsible  for  the 
acts  of  all.  That  is  the  rule  of  law ;  the 
onus  is  then  upon  them;  and  they  can  only 
meet  the  proof  by  showing  a  want  of  knowl 
edge  of  the  extreme  criminal  intents  of  the 
order,  and  that  they  took  only  the  first  or 
vestibule  degree.  That  lack  of  criminal 
knowledge  would  go  in  mitigation  of  the 
sentence. 

The  court  room  was  then  cleared  for  de 
liberation  on  the  objection  of  the  Judge 
Advocate. 

On  reopening  the  Court,  the  Judge  Ad 
vocate  announced  that  the  objection  had 
been  sustained  and  the  question  overruled. 

I  have  heard  public  declarations  made 
by  Mr.  Milligan  about  the  Order  of  the 
Sons  of  Liberty,  in  the  presence  of  a  large 
crowd,  and  about  his  being  made  a  Major 
General  in  the  organization.  That  declara 
tion  was  made  on  Jefferson  street,  in  Hunt- 
ington,  and  there  may  have  been  fifteen  or 
twenty  persons  present. 

Q.  State  what  these  declarations  were. 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate. 

The  Court  was  then  cleared  for  delibera 
tion.  On  being  reopened,  the  Judge  Advo- 


168 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


cate  announced  to  the  accused  that  the  ob 
jection  was  sustained. 

This  was  some  considerable  length  of 
time  before  Mr.  Milligan's  arrest,  and  was 
at  the  time  I  first  heard  of  the  office  of 
Major  General  being  conferred  upon  him. 
It  was  before  Dodd's  arrest,  and  was  about 
the  time  of  the  exposure  of  the  order  in 
the  public  prints,  though  I  had  not  at  that 
time  seen  them  myself. 

I  am  acquainted  with  Dr.  Zumro,  and 
have  for  the  past  four  years  been  quite  inti 
mately  acquainted.  He  lives  in  Rock  Creek, 
and  I  preach  within  four  and  half  miles  of  the 
place,  and  a  portion  of  my  congregation  re 
side  in  Dr.  Zumro's  visiting  district.  I  am 
acquainted  with  his  general  reputation  for 
truth  and  veracity  in  the  neighborhood 
where  he  lives.  That  general  reputation  is 
bad :  and  from  that  reputation  I  would  not 
believe  him  under  oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

His  reputation  is  bad  among  the  class  of 
men  that  attend  upon  my  ministry.  I  am 
a  Democrat,  but  do  not  consider  myself  a 
Butternut. 

I  have  heard  Mr.  Samuel  D.  Hays  fre 
quently  say  that  Dr.  Zumro  was  not  to  be 
trusted — that  he  would  not  place  confidence 
in  his  word.  Mr,. Hays  is  a  Democrat,  I 
have  also  heard  Mr.  Samuel  Brubaker  say, 
during  the  past  four  or  five  years,  that  Zum 
ro  was  not  a  man  of  truth.  I  heard  him 
say  this  during  last  summer.  I  have  heard 
Dr.  Zumro  thus  spoken  of  within  a  month. 
Mr.  Brubaker  also  spoke  of  Dr.  Zumro  as 
being  a  traitor  to  the  Democratic  party — 
professing  to  vote  the  Democratic  ticket, 
when  he"  held  exactly  the  opposite  senti 
ments. 

I  have  heard  Mr.  John  Brubaker  fre 
quently  speak  of  him  in  the  same  way.  I 
have  heard  him  so  speak  within  the  last 
two  months,  when  I  was  at  his  house.  Dr. 
Zumro  had  complained  to  me  that  the  Dem 
ocrats  had  not  patronized  him — that  af 
ter  he  had  voted  the  Democratic  ticket, 
his  patronage  had  fallen  off,  and  requested 
me  to  make  use  of  my  influence  to  get 
people  to  employ  him.  In  the  course  of 
the  conversation,  Mr.  Brubaker  said  that 
he  had  no  confidence  in  the  Doctor.  Mr. 
Brubaker  and  his  brother  are  Democrats. 
I  have  also  heard  James  Bandwit  repre 
sent  him  as  a  decidedly  deceptive  man; 
Mr.  Bandwit  is  a  Democrat.  I  have  heard 
Mr.  Peter  Bandwit  speak  of  him  in  the 
same  way.  I  have  known  Mr.  Peter  Band- 
wit  for  six  years,  but  I  do  not  know  whether 
he  is  a  Democrat  or  not. 

Soon  after  I  became  acquainted  with  Dr. 
Zumro,  I  was  cautioned  as  to  the  amount 
of  confidence  I  should  place  in  him.  I 
heard  his  character  spoken  of  to  great  dis 
advantage  fully  four  years  ago.  At  one 
time  I  felt  interested  in  him ;  I  stayed  at 


his  house  one  night,  and  have  called  on 
him  often,  and  he  has  called  at  our  house, 
and  we  regarded  him  as  a  pleasant  man, 
but  he  did  his  utmost  to  get  me  and  others 
into  this  organization,  and  thus  involve  us 
in  trouble.  I  have  no  particular  animosity 
toward  the  Doctor  on  that  ground.  Since 
the  sitting  of  this  Commission,  I  have  re 
fused  to  hold  any  communication  with  him, 
as  I  do  not  consider  it  safe  to  talk  with 
lim.  But  I  had  the  most  kindly  feeling 
;oward  him,  up  to  the  time  I  discovered 
lis  treachery  toward  me;  still  I  have  no  ill 
feeling  toward  him.  I  could  do  him  a 
kindness  now  as  well  as  I  ever  did.  It  is 
not  a  fact  that  the  church  over  which  I 
preside  is  composed  almost  entirely  of  Dem 
ocrats  ;  nor  is  it  true  that  Union  men 
have  refused  to  attend  my  preaching  on 
account  of  my  disloyal  sentiments.  I  sup 
pose  that  most  of  those  who  attend  my 
Breaching  belong  to  the  Democratic  party, 
but  others  do  attend.  The  Democrats 
would  be  but  a  small  majority.  I  have  not 
said  to  any  person  that  the  Eepublicans  re 
fused  to  attend  my  ministry. 

I  never  excluded  one  of  my  own  daughters 
from  my  house  for  marrying  a  Union  man, 
nor  did  I  threaten  to  whip  her  for  that 
offense.  I  never  laid  a  hand  on  her.  My 
laughter  visits  my  house  now  when  she  is 
inclined,  and  my  wife  visits  her. 

Q.  Did  you  use  any  violence  whatever  to 
ward  her? 

A.  None  whatever. 

Q.  Did  you  not  call  her  an  Abolitionist? 

A.  I  never  did. 

Q.  Have  you  not  yourself,  and  have  not 
members   of   your  family,  worn  Butternut  ? 
badges  at  public  meetings  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  neither  myself  nor  family; 
I  do  not  approve  of  such  things. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

The  trouble  about  my  daughter  grew  out 
of  the  fact  that  1  did  not  wish  her  to  marry 
at  that  time,  on  account  of  her  ill  health; 
she  was  at  that  time  suffering  from  the 
efi'ects  of  a  sun-stroke.  After  she  had  left 
my  house  I  was  so  interested  in  her,  that 
I  went  after  her  in  company  with  Mr.  Cof- 
froth. 

Some  of  the  strongest  Republicans  in 
the  town  of  Huntington  have  attended  my 
preaching,  among  others  Mr.  Davis,  who 
said  the  reason  he  attended,  was  because  I 
abused  no  persons,  but  preached  the  gospel 
I  received  a  Christmas  present  of  four  or 
five  hundred  dollars ;  I  was  furnished  with 
a  list  of  the  donors,  and  many  of  them 
were  Republicans.  Mr.  Milligan's  name 
was  not  on  the  list.  The  men  whom  I  have 
mentioned  as  speaking  of  Dr.  Zumro's 
character,  are  the  most  respectable  farmers 
in  the  place^and  there  are  others  I  have  not 
mentioned,  who  speak  of  him  in  the  same 
way;  that  reputation  has  been  the  same 


TREASON  TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


169 


for  some  years  past.  Those  who  have  thus 
spoken  against  Dr.  Zumro  are  not,  accord 
ing  to  their  own  declarations,  members  of 
the  Order  of  American  Knights  or  Sons  of 
Liberty. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
at  2  o'clock. 

AFTERNOON    SESSION. 

COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         \ 
November  18, 18C4,  2  o'clock,  P.  M.  J 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  ad 
journment. 

All  the  members  present;  also,  the  Judge 
Advocate,  the  accused  (except  W.  A.  Bowles), 
and  their  counsel. 

JOHN  G.  SCOTT  ON,  a  witness  for  the  ac 
cused,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly 
sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as 
follows : 

I  live  in  Huntington,  and  am  a  farmer; 
I  am  Justice  of  the  Peace.  I  have  lived  in 
the  neighborhood  twenty-two  years.  I  have 
known  Dr.  Zumro  about  seven  years,  and 
I  am  acquainted  with  his  general  rep 
utation  for  truth  and  veracity  in  the 
neighborhood  in  which  he  lives.  That  rep 
utation  is  bad ;  and  from  that  general  rep 
utation  I  would  not  believe  him  under 
oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  have  heard  Albert  Draper,  who  I  believe 
is  a  Republican,  say  that  Dr.  Zumro  was  not 
an  honest  man;  I  do  not  know  that  he  said 
any  thing  against  his  truth  and  veracity. 
1  have  heard  Dr.  Scott  say,  that  he  did  not 
consider  him  a  true  man  ;  he  said  he  was 
a  bad  man.  I  have  heard  Thomas  Smith 
speak  of  him;  his  opinion  was,  that  he  was 
a  mean  man.  I  have  heard  Jacob  Rausch 
say  that  he  was  a  damned  mean  man,  and 
that  he  would  not  believe  him  under  oath. 
Adam  Smith  spoke  against  his  truth  and 
veracity. 

Q.  Do  you  belong  to  the  Union  or  the 
Democratic  party  ? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  accused. 

The  Court  was  then  cleared  for  delibera 
tion  ;  on  being  reopened,  it  was  announced 
by  the  Judge  Advocate  that  the  objection 
was  overruled. 

A.  I  voted  the  Democratic  ticket.  I  do 
not  belong  to  any  secret  organization.  I 
do  not  know  but  that  I  joined  a  secret  or 
der  called  the  "Mighty  Host."  I  took  the 
oath,  but  never  acted  with  them. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Dr.  Scott,  Adam  Smith,  and  Mr.  Draper, 
of  whom  I  have  spoken,  are  Republi 
cans.  For  the  last  four  years  Dr.  Zumro 
has  been  holding  himself  out  as  a  Demo 
crat,  professing  to  act  with  the  Demo 
cratic  party.  It  was  during  this  time  that 
these  Democrats  thus  spoke  of  him. 

WILLIAM  SAYLER,  a  witness  for  the  accused, 


was  then  introduced,  and  being  duly  sworn 
by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  fol 
lows  : 

I  reside  in  Markle,  and  am  a  house  carpen 
ter  ;  I  have  lived  there  some  twelve  or  thir 
teen  years ;  I  have  known  Dr.  Zumro  ever 
since  I  have  lived  in  the  place.  I  know  his 
general  reputation  for  truth  and  veracity; 
that  reputation  is  bad;  and  I  would  not  be 
lieve  him  under  oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  am  a  Democrat;  I  belonged  to  a  secret 
society  called  the  Mighty  Host.  I  do  not 
know  that  that  society  merged  into  the 
Sons  of  Liberty,  though  I  saw  it  mentioned 
in  the  papers.  Dr.  Zumro  and  I  have  not 
been  friends,  but  I  have  never  to  any  per 
son  made  threats  against  Dr.  Zumro. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

The  society  called  the  "Mighty  Host," 
existed  about  three  years  ago,  and  I  was 
only  present  at  one  meeting,  and  had 
nothing  to  do  with  it  afterward. 

GEORGE  BAILEY,  a  witness  for  the  accused, 
was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly  sworn 
by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  fol 
lows: 

I  reside  in  Union  township,  Wells  county, 
Indiana,  and  am  a  house  carpenter;  I  have 
known  Dr.  Zumro  seven  or  eight  years.  I 
am  acquainted  with  his  reputation  for 
truth  and  veracity;  it  is  bad,  and  I  would 
not  believe  him  under  oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  have  always  voted  the  Democratic  ticket. 
I  belonged  to  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of 
Liberty,  but  only  attended  two  meetings. 
I  also  belonged  to  the  society  called  the 
Mighty  Host ;  that  was  before  the  Sons  of 
Liberty. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

I  have  heard  conversations  in  regard  to 
Dr.  Zumro's  want  of  truth  and  verp.city, 
from  both  Republicans  and  Democrats. 

WILLIAM  ALLEN,  a  witness  for  the  ac 
cused,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly 
sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as 
follows: 

I  live  in  Markle,  Huntington  county,  In 
diana,  and  am  a  blacksmith.  I  have  been 
acquainted  with  Dr.  Zumro  seven  or  eight 
years.  I  am  acquainted  with  his  reputa 
tion  for  truth  and  veracity,  and  that  repu 
tation  is  bad;  I  would  not  believe  him 
under  oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  belong  to  the  Democratic  party  I 
think  Dr.  Zumro's  reputation  in  the  neigh 
borhood  in  which  he  lives  may  be  as  good  as 
my  own.  I  have  never  heard  Mr.  Coffroth 
say  in  the  Common  Pleas  Court,  of  our 
county,  that  he  would  not  believe  him  un« 


170 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


der  oath.  I  am  not  a  member  of  the  Or 
der  of  Sons  of  Liberty,  nor  of  the  Circle  of 
the  Mighty  Host. 

WILLIAM  WOLF,  a  witness  for  the  accused, 
was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly  sworn 
by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  fol 
lows  : 

I  live  in  Rock  Creek  township,  and  am 
a  farmer.  I  am  acquainted  with  the  repu 
tation  of  Dr.  Zumro  for  truth  and  vera 
city  in  th<>  neighborhood  in  which  he  lives. 
That  reputation,  from  what  I  have  learned, 
is  bad,  and  I  would  not  believe  him  under 
oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  belong  to  the  Democratic  party.  I 
joined  a  secret  society  that,  I  think,  was 
called  the  Circle  of  the  Mighty  Host,  but 
I  only  attended  one  meeting.  I  never 
learned  what  was  the  purpose  and  object 
of  the  order,  and  I  left  it  because  1  thought 
it  did  not  amount  to  much.  I  understood 
it  was  a  loyal  organization. 

W.  M.  SWASEY,  a  witness  for  the  accused, 
was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly  sworn 
by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  fol 
lows: 

I  reside  in  Huntington,  and  am  a  phy 
sician  and  surgeon.  I  have  practiced  medi 
cine  for  twenty  years.  I  have  been  Mr. 
Milligan's  physician  since  I  have  been  at 
Huntington — though  Dr.  Layman  has  at 
tended  Mrs.  Milligan.  Mr.  Milligan  was 
taken  sick  in  August,  and  consulted  me  be 
fore  he  went  to  the  Chicago  Convention ; 
he  again  consulted  me  after  his  return. 
My  first  charge  I  notice  is  for  the  7th  of 
September.  About  the  12th  of  September 
I  first  visited  Mr.  Milligan,  when  he  was 
confined  to  his  bed  _with  bilious  intermit 
ting  fever  of  the  nervous  character,  which 
had  assumed  a  typhoid  form.  I  had  to  ad 
minister  calomel,  mercurials  and  opiates. 
He  was  consequently  very  nervous  and  ir 
ritable,  and  was  scarcely  rational  any  part 
of  the  time  I  was  there  during  my  daily 
yisits.  I  continued  to  treat  him  up  to  the 
time  he  was  arrested,  and  though  much 
improved,  he  was  then  very  feeble.  On  the 
12th,  when  I  commenced  giving  him  opium 
and  morphine  with  mercurials  and  qui 
nine,  and  for  ten  dajrs  from  the  12th,  he 
was  continually  under  the  influence  of  an 
odynes.  During  this  time  he  was  what 
might  be  called  nighty. 

GEORGE  BAILEY  was  then  recalled  as 
a  witness  for  the  Government,  and  testified 
as  follows : 

The  witness  was  requested  to  look  at 
the  following  obligation,  and  state  if  that 
was  the  obligation  of  the  Mighty  Host. 

The  following  oath,  purporting  to  be  the 
obligation  administered  to  the  ICnights  of 
the  Golden  Circle  in  De  Kalb  and  Allen 
counties,  Indiana,  was  then  read  by  the 
Judge  Advocate: 


"I, ,  do  solemnly  swear,  in  the 

presence  of  Almighty  God,  that  I  will  go  to 
the  relief  of  all  good  and  loyal  Democrats, 
and  will  not  suffer  the  confiscation  of  their 
property,  either  North  or  South;  and  I  fur 
ther  promise  that  I  will  suffer  my  body  to 
be  severed  in  four  parts,  one  part  to  be  cast 
out  at  the  east  gate,  one  part  out  at  the  west 
gate,  me  part  out  at  the  north  gate,  and 
one  part  out  at  the  south  gate,  before  I  will 
suffer  the  privileges  bequeathed  by  our 
forefathers  to  be  blotted  out  or  trampled 
under  foot  forever.  I  further  promise  and 
swear,  that  I  will  go  to  the  aid,  from  the  first 
to  the  fourth  signal,  of  all  Democrats,  North 
or  South.  I  further  promise  and  swear, 
that  I  will  not  reveal  any  of  the  secret 
signs,  passwords,  or  grips,  to  any  one  not 
Legally  authorized  by  this  order  to  receive 
the  same,  binding  myself  under  no  less  a 
penalty  than  having  my  bowels  torn  out, 
and  cast  out  to  the  four  winds  of  heaven ; 
so  help  me  God.  I  further  promise  and 
swear,  that  I  will  do  all  in  my  power  to 
bring  all  good  Democrats  into  this  Circle  of 
Hosts.  I  further  promise  and  swear,  that  I 
will  do  all  in  my  power,  by  all  honorable 
means,  and  all  other  means  in  reach,  to  sub 
vert,  or  overthrow,  the  present  damnable, 
Yankee,  Abolition  Administration;  so  help 
me  God." 

I  do  not  think  this  is  the  oblivion  I 
took;  nor  do  I  ever  remember  hearing  of 
such  a  one.  The  obligation  I  took  agreed 
to  sustain  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,  and  the  Constitution  of  Indiana. 
The  penalty  for  revealing  the  secrets  of  the 
society,  was,  that  we  were  to  be  torn  into 
four  parts. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Monday,  the  21st  of  November,  1864,  at 
2  o'clock,  P.  M. 

COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         ) 
November  21,  1864,  2  o'clock,  P.  M.  J 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

All  the  members  present.  Also,  the  Judge 
Advocate,  the  accused  (except  W.  A.  Bowles), 
and  their  counsel. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

The  following  dispatch  was  then  read  to 
the  Court  by  the  Judge  Advocate : 

«'  WASHINGTON,  D.  C.,  November  18, 1864. 
"To  Major  If.  L.  Burnett,  Judge  Advocate: 

"  This  is  authority  from  the  Secretary  of 
War  to  retain  Colonel  Ansel  D.  Wass,  60th 
Massachusetts,  as  member  of  Court-martial, 
as  requested  in  your  telegram  of  yesterday, 
to  Judge  Advocate  General. 

[Signed]        "THOS.  M.  VINCENT, 
"A  A.   G." 

The  following  was  then  submitted  by  the 
counsel  for  the  accused,  William  A.  Bowles: 
"  To  the  President  and  Members  of  the  Military 

Commission : 

"  I  hereby  waive  any  objection  to  the  ab- 


TREASON    TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


171 


sence  of  Colonel  A.  D.  Wass,  60th  Massa 
chusetts,  during  the  past  few  days ;  and  do 
now  consent  to  his  taking  his  seat  as  a 
member  of  the  Commission,  and  request 
that  he  may  do  so;  and  1  hereby  waive  all 
objections  that  might  otherwise  be  raised 
against  his  remaining  on  said  Commission, 
until  the  close  of  my  trial ;  and  legalize  and 
sanction  the  same  as  far  as  my  request  and 
full  consent  thereto  can  possibly  do. 

[Signed]  "W.  A.  BOWLES. 

u  November  21,  1864. 

[Signed]  "J.  W.  GORDON, 

"M.  M.  KAY." 

Colonel  Wass,  being  present  in  Court,  by 
consent  and  expressed  desire  of  all  the  ac 
cused,  then  took  his  seat  as  a  member  of 
the  Commission. 

WILLIAM  HIKES,  a  witness  for  the  accused, 
was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly  sworn 
by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  follows : 
'  I  live  in  Green  county,  in  this  State,  and 
am  a  farmer.  I  am  acquainted  with  the 
accused,  Andrew  Humphreys.  I  have 
known  him  from  twelve  to  fourteen  years. 
Politically,  we  do  not  agree.  I  know  that 
Mr.  Humphreys  has  abused  the  Adminis 
tration  since  the  war  broke  out.  Since  that 
time  I  have  heard  him  deliver  two  political 
speeches.  In  the  first  speech  1  heard  him 
make,  he  criticised  the  acts  of  the  Govern 
ment  pretty  severely.  Speaking  in  relation 
to  the  draft,  and  obedience  to  the  law,  he 
used  about  this  language:  "I  advise  no  man 
to  resist  the  draft,  nor  evade  any  law  passed 
by  Congress,  but  I  advise  all  to  be  good,  law- 
abiding  citizens."  That  speech  was  made  dur 
ing  the  summer  of  1S63,  in  Green  county,  on 
what  is  called  the  Five  Mile  Prairie.  It  was 
delivered  to  the  citizens  of  Washington  town 
ship;  and  there  were,  perhaps,  one  hundred 
or  one  hundred  and  fifty  men  and  women 
there.  In  his  remarks  he  paid  a  good  deal 
of  attention  to  the  financial  policy  of  Mr. 
Chase.  He  wound  up  by  telling  the  people 
that  they  had  better  not  resist  the  draft,  or 
the  law  of  the  United  States.  There  had 
been  some  talk  about  house-burning,  and  I 
remember  Mr.  Humphreys  directed  his  re 
marks  to  me  in  his  speech,  and  said  that  he 
would  knock  the  chunk  out  of  any  man's 
hand  that  would  attempt  to  set  fire  to  my 

Property,  or  to  any  Republican's  property, 
think  I  was  the*  only  Republican  at  the 
meeting.  The  next  occasion  on  which  I 
heard  him,  was  about  the  middle  of  Sep 
tember  last,  a  few  days  prior  to  his  arrest. 
He  was  speaking  to  the  citizens  of  Green 
and  Sullivan  counties.  This  speech  was 
made  in  the  town  of  Linton.  I  was  only 
passing  by,  and  heard  but  part  of  it.  A  good 
many  people  were  present.  I  heard  him 
say  that  resistance  to  the  Government 
would  not  do  at  all,  in  any  shape  or  form. 
That  resistance  was  sure  to  bring  disaster 
upon  them.  That  they  must  remain  at 


;  home,  and  quietly  submit  to  the  laws  of  the 
i  Government.  I  believe  he  proposed  to  re- 
[  ceive  money  to  pay  for  substitutes  for 
drafted  men,  who  could  not  afford  to  get 
them  themselves.  I  may  have  heard  him 
speak  five  minutes;  1  was  sitting  on  my 
horse  at  the  time ;  I  did  not  hear  any  one 
else  address  the  meeting.  He  exhorted 
them  to  obey  the  laws.  There  seemed  to 
be  some  excitement  among  a  part  of  those 
who  were  present,  and  I  think  it  was  in  re 
gard  to  the  resistance  of  the  draft.  I  so 
judged  from  what  I  heard  them  say.  The 
reason  why  the  people  were  "down"  on 
him,  as  I  understood,  was  for  advising  them 
to  submit  to  the  draft.  Mr.  Humphreys 
has  for  years  been  an  active  Democrat,  and 
has  usually  taken  an  active  part  in  all  polit 
ical  matters  in  the  county.  He  is  a  man  of 
influence  in  the  party.  I  believe  Mr.  Hum 
phreys'  reputation  is  that  of  a  moral  man ; 
I  do  not  know  that  he  is  a  religious  man,  or 
that  he  makes  any  pretensions  to  religion. 
As  to  his  political  principles,  some  of  my 
friends  call  him  a  "Butternut"  and  a  "Cop 
perhead,"  and  even  a  "traitor,"  speaking  of 
him  politically.  Outside  of  mere  political 
controversies,  I  believe  that  the  majority  of 
his  neighbors  consider  him  a  loyal  man. 

WILLIAM  JOHNSON,  a  witness  for  the  ac 
cused,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly 
sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as 
follows : 

I  reside  in  Green  county,  Indiana.  I  am 
I  a  farmer.  I  am  acquainted  with  Andrew 
!  Humphreys;  I  live  about  a  mile  and  a  half 
from  where  he  does  business,  and  about  six 
miles  from  his  residence.  I  have  known 
him  for  ten  years.  I  am  acquainted  with 
his  general  reputation  and  moral  character, 
[  and  as  a  law-abiding  citizen,  and  it  is  good. 
Politically,  I  differ  from  Mr.  Humphreys. 
His  general  reputation  outside  of  what 
politicians  say  in  our  county,  and  so  far  as  I 
know,  he  is  respected  by  both  parties.  I 
heard  him  make  a  speech,  I  think,  in  August 
last,  in  Linton,  Green  county.  It  was  de 
livered  to  the  citizens  of  Green  and  Sullivan 
counties.  It  was  a  Democratic  political 
meeting.  Mr.  Burton,  of  Sullivan,  spoke. 
Mr.  Humphreys,  in  his  remarks,  quoted 
from  Jefferson's  writings,  and  from  Washing 
ton's  farewell  address;  and  he  spoke  of  se 
cession  as  the  right  of  a  State. 

He  uttered  no  sentiment  or  exhortation 
to  the  people  to  resist  the  laws,  or  to  oppose 
the  Government.  Mr.  Humphreys  lias 
always  expressed  himself  personally  to  me 
in  favor  of  obedience  to  the  laws. 

Q.  State  whether  or  not  Andrew  Hum 
phreys  in  the  localities  of  Green  and  Sulli 
van  counties  has,  according  to  your  obser 
vation,  been  engaged  in  exciting  and  in 
flaming,  or  allaying  the  passions  of  the 
people  ? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate,  and  withdrawn. 


172 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


CROSS-EXAMINATION". 

In  Mr.  Humphreys'  speech,  I  understood 
him  to  argue  in  favor  of  the  right  of  a  State 
to  secede,  and  that  secession,  therefore,  was 
right.  I  can  not  say  that  he  endeavored  to 
convince  the  people  of  this  in  his  speech, 
but  such  seemed  to  be  the  inference  from 
the  extracts  which  he  read.  Among  the 
people  of  our  county,  the  character  of  Mr. 
Humphreys  is  not  considered  loyal. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

When  I  speak  of  those  who  do  not  con 
sider  Mr.  Humphreys  loyal,  I  mean  the 
Union  party,  and  it  embraces  some  Demo 
crats.  I  only  consider  those  loyal  who  are 
in  favor  of  the  prosecution  of  the  war  for 
the  suppression  of  the  rebellion.  That  is  my 
only  test  of  loyalty. 

Q.  Did  he  argue  that  while  the  Federal 
Government  could  enforce  its  laws  against 
individuals,  that  yet  there  was  no  power  to 
coerce  States  in  their  sovereign  capacity  ? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate,  and  withdrawn. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Tuesday,  November  22,  at  10  o'clock, 
A.  M. 


COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,        { 
November  22,  1864,  10  o'clock,  A.  M.) 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

All  the  members  present.  Also,  the 
Judge  Advocate,  the  accused  (except  W. 
A.  Bowles),  and  their  counsel. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

WILLIAM  C.  KOCHER,  a  witness  for  the  ac 
cused,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly 
sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as 
follows: 

I  reside  in  Huntington  county,  and  prac 
tice  lawr.  I  am  Mayor  of  Huntington  bor 
ough.  I  have  known  Mr.  Milligan  for  ten 
years;  and  am  acquainted  with  his  general 
moral  reputation,  in  the  neighborhood  in 
which  he  lives;  that  reputation  is  good. 
His  reputation  also  as  a  peaceable,  orderly, 
law-abiding  citizen  has  been  good  in  that 
community  as  far  as  I  know.  The  relations 
existing  between  myself  and  Mr.  Milligan 
since  the  summer  of  1855,  have  not  been 
friendly. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

The  reason  why  my  relations  have  not 
been  very  friendly  with  Mr.  Milligan  are, 
that  when  I  came  to  Indiana,  a  young  man 
and  a  stranger,  Mr.  Milligan  wyas  one  of  the 
older  members  of  the  bar.  and  he  took  a 
strong  position  against  me.  I  am  not  aware 
that  he  had  any  reason  for  so  doing.  He 
opposed  other  young  attorneys  in  that  place 
in  like  manner.  His  opposition  took  the 
form  of  brow-beating  when  I  appeared  as 
counsel  on  the  opposite  side.  In  politics  I 


am  a  Democrat,  though  I  do  not  belong  to 
Mr.  Milligan's  party;  I  am  a  War  Democrat. 
In   saying  that  Mr.  Milligan's  general  char-^ 
acter  is  good,  I  do  not  refer  to  his  reputation* 
as  a  loyal  man  in  the  support  of   his  Gov 
ernment. 

JOSEPH  JOHNSON,  a  witness  for  the  accused, 
was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly  sworn 
by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  follows: 

I  reside  in  Wells  county  ;  my  occupation 
is  farming.  I  am  acquainted  with  Dr. 
Zumro.  of  Markle;  I  have  knowrn  him  some 
ten  years.  I  am  acquainted  with  his  gen 
eral  reputation  for  truth  and  veracity  in 
the  neighborhood  in  which  he  lives,  and 
know  that  that  reputation  is  bad,  and  I 
could  not  believe  him  under  oath.  I  be 
came  a  member  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty 
about  June  or  July  last,  in  Kockcreek  town 
ship,  Wells  county.  I  was  initiated  in  com 
pany  with  Dr.  Zumro,  John  Hautz,  Isaac 
Decker,  Henry  Johnson  and  Nathan  John 
son;  I  joined  at  the  solicitation  of  Dr. 
Zumro.  Dr.  Horton,  who  initiated  us,  told 
us  it~wTas  an  organization  to  support  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  the 
Constitution  of  the  State  of  Indiana,  and  to 
protect  the  rights  and  liberties  of  the  peo 
ple  at  the  ballot-box.  He  said  nothing 
about  the  organization  being  intended  to 
subdue  the  Abolitionists,  resist  the  draft,  or 
assist  the  Southern  Confederacy.  The  mil 
itary  part  of  the  organization  was  gotten 
up  by  Dr.  Zumro,  or,  at  any  rate,  the  sub 
ject  was  introduced  by  him,  but  for  what 
purposes  I  can  not  tell.  I  went  with  Dr. 
Zumro,  at  his  request,  in  September,  to  see 
Mr.  Milligan.  Dr.  Zumro  asked  him  what 
wre  should  do  about  the  draft;  Mr.  Milligan's 
reply  was,  "We  can  not  do  any  thing."  Dr. 
Zumro  asked  what  the  boys  were  doing 
about  Huntington;  his  reply  was,  "They 
are  doing  the  best  they  can,  they  are  hiring 
substitutes,  and  every  man  is  taking  care  of 
himself  in  the  best  manner  he  can."  The 
Doctor  said,  "  I  do  not  like  to  submit  to  the 
draft  myself,  but  I  think  it  would  be  a  poor 
chance  for  a  man  to  try  to  get  away."  Mr. 
Milligan  replied,  "  If  I  were  to  make  an 
attempt  to  get  away,  I  would  not  be  afraid 
of  twenty  men  arresting  me."  Nothing 
was  stated  to  the  effect  that  if  a  revolt  was 
started  by  ten  men,  others  would  flock  in 
in  large  numbers  ;  Mr.  Milligan  at  the  time 
was  very  sick  on  his  bed.  The  Doctor  spoke 
a  few  words  to  him,  and  he  replied  that  he 
was  very  wreak,  and  did  not  wrish  to  con 
verse.  Dr.  Zumro  stated  to  me,  after  leav 
ing  Mr.  Milligan,  that  if  he  was  drafted  he 
would  take  medicine  and  be  sick  all  the 
time,  and  if  I  was  drafted  he  would  serve 
me  in  the  same  way.  When  Dr.  Zumrt> 
asked  Mr.  Milligan  what  the  order  was  going 
to  do  about  the  draft,  to  the  best  of  my 
recollection  Mr.  Milligan  said  that  the  order 
was  disbanded,  and  that  he  could  not  ex 
pect  any  thing  from  it. 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


173 


CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

On  the  morning  of  the  day  on  which 
saw  Mr.  Milligan,  I  called  at  Dr.  Zumro' 
house,  as  we  had  arranged  the  night  before 
at  a  meeting  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty;   some 
twenty-five  or  thirty  members  were  present 
and  John  Hautz,  who  was  the  Grand  Seign 
ior,  presided.     At  that  meeting  Dr.  Zumro 
was  requested  by  some  members  to  go  tc 
Huntington  to  see  Mr.    Milligan,  and  the 
Doctor  invited  me  to  accompany  him.    It  is 
eleven  miles   from  where   I   live,    and  we 
went  on  horseback.     The  meeting  was  hek 
at    Jacob  Farling's,    Rockcreek    township 
Wells  county,  and  Dr.  Zumro  was  the  only 
member  present  from  Huntington  county 
I  never  attended  any  meeting  at  Hunting 
ton  township.     I    think  that  Mr.  Milligan 
had  said  that  the  order  was  disbanded ;  il 
was  riot  at  that  time  in  our  township;  I  did 
not,  however,  so  state  to  Mr.  Milligan.     Dr. 
Zumro   was  appointed  by   the   meeting  in 
general,  as   a  committee  to  visit  Hunting 
ton ;  at  the  same  time  Jacob  Farling  was 
sent  to  Blulfton  to  see  what  they  were  going 
to  do  about  the  draft,  I  suppose.     Nothing 
was  said  in  the  meeting,  to  my  knowledge, 
as  to  what  they  were  to  be  sent  for,  or  who 
they   were  to   see;  and  it   was  only  as  we 
were  going  along,  that  Dr.  Zumro  said  that 
he  thought  Mr.  Milligan  was  about  as  good 
a  man  to  see  as  we  could  go  to.     The  mili 
tary  article  which  Dr.  Zurnro  introduced  to 
the  order,  he  said,  was  written  by  Mr.  Mil 
ligan  ;   at  the  next  meeting  he  pretended 
Mr.    I  bach    wrote   it;  1    do  not   remember 
how  many  members  signed  it ;  I  did ;  but  T 
never  drilled.     There  was  no  rule  requiring 
us  to  drill.     I  have  no  arms,  except  a  rifle 
and  a  revolver,  which  I  have  had  for  some 
years.     The  draft  was  frequently  spoken  of 
by  members,  but  no  decision  was  come  to. 
Some  talked  of  hiring  substitutes,  and  oth 
ers  proposed  running  off.    Something  might 
have   been  said   about  resisting  the  draft, 
but  not  by  the  leaders  of  the  organization. 
Some   said,    "  I  will   resist;"    some,  "  I  will 
fight  or  run  off."     On  our  return  from  Hun 
tington  we  met  Mr.  Samuel  Day ;  but  I  did 
not  say  to  him  or  to  Mr.  Coffroth,  or  Mr. 
Winters,  whom  we  saw  afterward,  that  Mr. 
Milligan  had  advised  resistance  to  the  draft, 
nor  did  I  hear  it  said  by  any  body.     Mr. 
Coffroth,  I  remember,  advised  us  to  go  home 
and  rest  easy  about  the  draft,  or  something 
like  that.* 

SAMUEL  WINTERS,  a  witness  for  the  accused, 
was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly  sworn 
by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  fol 
lows: 


*  In  giving  the  testimony  of  unimportant  witnesses,  it 
has  been  the  aim  of  the  Editor  to  omit  all  irrelevant 
matter,  or  matter  that  did  not  elicit,  or  confirm,  some 
fact  inquired  for.  The  record  of  the  examination  of  this 
witness— an  exceedingly  ignorant  ono— fills  thirty-nine 
pages  of  legal  cap,  averaging  two  hundred  words  to  a 
page,  but  the  brief  synopsis  here  given  contains  all  the 
(acts  to  which  he  testified. 


I  reside  in  Huntington,  Indiana,  where 
I  publish  the  Huntington  Democrat,  a  Dem 
ocratic  newspaper.  I  became  a  member 
of  the  American  Knights — but  not  of  the 
Sons  of  Liberty — in  Huntington,  sometime 
in  October,  1863.  Mr.  Milligan  was  a  mem 
ber  of  that  association,  but  held  no  office. 
He  used  his  influence  to  prevent  any  but 
responsible  and  respectable  men  from  be 
coming  members ;  I  never  knew  of  any  ef 
forts  on  his  part  to  extend  the  organization 
or  establish  branch  temples.  The  order 
was  disbanded  sometime  in  April,  and  we 
ceased  to  meet  as  an  organization.  It  never 
was  merged  into  the  Sons  of  Liberty.  I 
was  a  delegate  from  the  Huntington  tem 
ple  to  the  Council  held  here  in  February; 
Mr.  Milligan  was  not  present;  I  know  it 
from  the  fact  that  I  asked  him  to  attend 
with  me,  and  he  declined  on  account  of 
being  too  unwell.  I  attended  the  meeting 
of  the  Council  on  the  afternoon  of  the  17th ; 
I  know  nothing  of  Mr.  Milligan's  appoint 
ment  as  Major  General. 

I  am  only  slightly  acquainted  with  Dr. 
Zumro;  I  know  him  when  I  see  him.  In 
September  last  he  called  at  my  office  in 
company  with  another  man,  and  asked  me 
what  the  order  was  going  to  do  about  the 
draft;  I  asked  "What  order?"  He  then 
asked,  "What  are  the  boys  going  to  do 
about  the  draft  ?  "  I  said,  "  I  do  not  know." 
[  inquired,  "  What  do  you  propose  to  do  ?" 
His  reply  was,  "to  resist  it;"  to  which  I 
.•ejoined,  "If  you  think  so,  why  the  devil 
don't  you  resist  it?"  I  had  no  knowledge 
at  the  time  of  the  part  he  was  playing, 
:>ut  I  did  not  trust  him,  and  did  not  want 
to  have  any  thing  to  do  with  him. 

I  understood  the  object  of  the  Order  of 
American  Knights  was  to  disseminate  cor 
rect  political  principles  in  relation  to  the 
theory  of  our  Government;  and  also  as  an 
offset  to  the  Union  League  in  our  county. 
I  understood  it  to  be  a  purely  political  or 
ganization,  and  it  had  no  avowed  purpose 
of  resisting  the  draft  or  any  law  of  the 
Government. 

1  was  present  at  the  Fort  Wayne  meet- 
ng,  and  heard  the  whole  of  Mr.  Milligan's 
ipeech.     It  was  in  his  usual  style,  elaborate 
irgument,   and,  as   I  thought,  not    suited 
:o  the  occasion,  and  was  not  calculated  to 
3reate  any  enthusiasm  among  the  masses. 
Nothing  was  said  denunciatory  of  the  Gov 
ernment.      Mr.  Milligan  always  separated 
the  Administration  from  the  Government; 
whether  he  did  in  that  speech  or  not,  I  can 
not    distinctly    remember.      I    believe    he 
tated  that  opposition  would  occur  under 
my  Administration,  and  that  if  there  were 
my  present  who  expected  him    to  arraign 
he  Administration,   they  would  be  disap- 
>ointed,  as  he  would  leave  that  to  persona 
vho  delighted  to  arraign  it.     He  spoke  of 
oercion ;  he  denied  the  power  of  the  Gov- 
rnment  to  coerce  States,  but  admitted  ita 


174 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


power  to  coerce  individuals.  Nothing  to 
my  recollection  was  said  calculated  to  ex 
cite  insurrection,  or  resistance  to  the  draft; 
if  any  thing  had  been  said,  I  should  proba 
bly  remember  it.  I  made  a  report  of  that 
speech  at  the  time,  but  have  not  consulted 
it  recently.  I  have  been  intimately  ac 
quainted  with  Mr.  Milligan  since  the  fall 
of  1858,  and  I  know  his  general  reputation 
as  to  moral  character  in  that  community; 
it  is  good;  and  also  his  reputation  as  a 
peaceable,  law-abiding  citizen,  which  is  also 
good. 

Q.  Are  you  acquainted  with  his  general 
character  as  a  loyal  man,  well  disposed  to 
the  preservation  of  the  Government  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  what  you  mean  by  the 
word  "loyal."  I  am  acquainted  with  his 
general  reputation  for  attachment  to  the 
general  principles  of  our  Government,  and 
its  preservation ;  it  is  good. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  understand  Mr.  Milligan  to  be  in  favor 
of  the  Union  of  the  States,  but  I  do  not 
know  that  he  is  favor  of  the  prosecution  of 
the  war  for  the  suppression  of  the  rebel 
lion.  In  conversations  which  I  have  had 
with  him,  he  has  always  maintained  that  a 
war  waged  against  foreign  States  was  an  ab- 
surdity^and  1  have  heard  him  say  that  he 
was  against  the  present  war,  because  it  was 
an  unconstitutional  one.  He  is,  therefore, 
opposed  to  the  prosecution  of  the  present 
war,  and  I  have  heard  him  say  so:  He 
said  at  the  Fort  Wayne  meeting,  that  the 
existing  war  was  an  absurdity.  He  said  that 
if  the  war  was  right,  the  draft  was  right; 
but  he  did  not  say  that  if  the  war  was 
wrong,  the  draft  was  wrong.  I  never  saw  any 
thing"  of  the  military  part  of  the  order 
untif  I  saw  it  in  the  public  prints.  The 
purpose  of  the  order  was  the  inculcation 
of  correct  opinions  or  principles  of  Govern 
ment,  among  which  were  the  Kentucky 
Resolutions  of  1798.  These  resolutions  I 
understand  give  the  States  the  right  to 
judge  of  their  own  grievances,  that  they 
are  on  an  equality  with  the  General  Gov 
ernment,  and  are  co-equal  with  it,  and  may 
bo  so  construed  as  to  give  them  the  right 
to  dissolve  the  contract.  I  was  initiated  in 
the  three  degrees  of  the  order  by  Dodd, 
who  took  us  through  the  three  degrees  the 
first  evening.  I  took  the  obligation  and  as 
sented  to  its  principles.  The  expression, 
"the  Supreme  Commander  shall  be  Com 
mander-in-chief  of  all  military  forces  be 
longing  to  the  order,  in  the  various  States 
when  called  into  active  service,"  I  consid 
ered  a  figurative  expression.  I  remember 
this  part  of  the  obligation  which  I  sub 
scribed  to: 

"I  do  further  promise,  that  I  will,  at  all 
times,  if  needs  be,  take  up  arms  in  the 
cause  of  the  oppressed — in  my  country  first  of 
all — against  any  monarch,  prince,  potentate, 


power,  or  government  usurped,  which  may 
be  found  in  arms,  and  waging  war  against 
a  people  or  peoples,  who  are  endeavoring  to 
establish,  or  have  inaugurated,  a  govern 
ment  for  themselves,  of  their  own  free 
choice,  in  accordance  with,  and  founded 
upon,  the  eternal  principles  of  truth,  which  I 

have  sworn  in  the  V ,  and  now  in  this 

presence  do  swear,  to  maintain  inviolate 
and  defend  with  my  life.  This  I  do  prom 
ise,  without  reservation  or  evasion  of  mind; 
without  regard  to  the  name,  station,  condi 
tion  or  designation  of  the  invading  or  co 
ercing  power,  whether  it  shall  arise  within 
or  come  from  without." 

I  do  not  know  that  it  had  any  reference 
to  an  attempt  to  establish  a  government 
within  this  Government.  I  did  not  under 
stand  that  the  order  was  to  assist  in  the 
establishing  of  the  Southern  Confederacy ; 
I  did  not  understand  it  so,  nor  do  I  believe 
that  they  have  established  a  separate  Gov 
ernment;  they  have  established  a  sort  of  a 
Government,  but  I  do  not  understand  that 
it  is  their  intention  to  absolve  themselves 
from  their  allegiance  to  the  old  Union  of 
the  States.  I  believe  if  the  Constitution 
was  construed  as  the  Supreme  Bench  con 
strued  it  in  the  Dred  Scott  case,  they  would 
come  back  to  the  Union.  I  do  believe  that 
they  are  waging  war  to  establish  a  separate 
Government,  but  that  they  intend  to  come 
back  to  the  Union.  I  do  not  think  that 
the  President  of  the  Southern  Confederacy, 
when  he  said  that  they  were  trying  to  es 
tablish  a  separate  Government,  represented 
the  people  of  the  South.  I  could  not  say 
that  any  prominent  man  in  the  South  has 
said  other  than  that  they  were  fighting  to 
establish  a  separate  Government,  but  I  have 
read  something  from  Alexander  H.  Stephens 
in  which  he  does  not  say  they  will  not  come 
back ;  and  though  he  may  not  have  said  a 
word  in  favor  of  it,  he  has  said  nothing 
against  it.  There  is  not,  to  my  recollection, 
any  thing  he  has  said  in  favor  of  any  peace, 
save  011  the  terms  of  equality.  I  do  not 
believe  that  the  Southerners  are  fighting 
for  a  separate  Government,  but  for  the  Con 
stitution  as  interpreted  by  the  Dred  Scott 
decision.  That  decision  is  in  relation  to 
their  slave  property — they  want  guarantees 
to  protect  it  in  transit  through  the  States, 
and  the  right  to  take  it  into  the  Territo 
ries.  This  is  my  own  judgment.  I  have 
also  seen  it  advocated  in  public  prints,  more 
especially  the  New  York  Day  Book.  I  re 
collect  reading  copious  extracts  from  South 
ern  speeches,  avowing  that  they  were  not 
fighting  for  a  separate  Government.  I  as 
sert  that  the  South  has  been  fighting  for 
their  rights  as  defined  in  the  Dred  Scott 
decision,  and  I  regard  the  reason  of  their 
flying  to  arms  to  obtain  that  which  they 
already  had  a  right  to,  by  the  decision  of 
the  Courts  of  the  land,  with  the  whole  ex 
ecutive  power  of  the  Government  pledged 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


175 


to  enforce   it;   that    they    supposed   their 
rights  would  not  be  sufficiently  respected 


do  not  think  the  de- 
was   enforced   to    suit 


to  suit  them;  and  I 
cision  in  that  case 
them. 

Q.  Can  you  tell  when  and  where  that  de 
cision  was  not  enforced  ? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  accused,  for 
the  reason  that  it  was  not  pertinent  to  the 
question  in  issue  in  this  trial. 

The  Judge  Advocate  said: 

This  witness  has  undertaken  to  state  that 
Mr.  Milligan  was  loyal  in  his  sentiments, 
reputation  and  character,  and  devoted  to 
the  maintenance  of  the  laws  and  Constitu 
tion  of  his  country;  and  he  further  said, 
that  the  order  had  nothing  in  it  but  a  sim 
ple  exposition  of  the  theories  of  the  Gov 
ernment,  as  held  by  certain  persons.  I 
deem  it  material  to  show  this  Court  that 
Mr.  Milligan's  principles  were  opposed  to 
the  Constitution,  and  to  the  very  life  of  the 
Government  itself;  that  the  theories  pro 
mulgated  in  this  order  were  false,  disloyal, 
and  destructive  of  the  foundations  of  good 
order  and  of  society.  That  the  foundations 
of  the  order  were  lies,  and  that  it  was  trea 


chusetts,  and  I  think  in  Pennsylvania  and 
Maine;  and  it  is  my  impression  that  these 
States  punish  any  person  who  assists  in  t'he 
capture  of  an  escaped  slave. 

Q.  Do  not  these  bills  expressty  state,  and 
are  they  not  expressly  for  the  punishment 
of  kidnapping  in  violation  of  the  laws  of 
the  State? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  accused,  and 
withdrawn. 

I  took  notes  of  the  speech  of  Mr.  Milli 
gan  at  Fort  Wayne.  I  am  not  a  short 
hand  reporter,  but  I  am  a  rapid  writer,  and 
1  wrote  down  as  much  of  the  speech  as  I 
could  in  long  hand,  giving  the  substance  of 
it  as  I  could  recollect. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  whether  this  portion 
of  Mr.  Milligan's  speech  is  as  he  gave  it: 
"They  (the  States)  were  thirteen  nations, 
and  finally  formed  a  Constitution,  adopted 
separately  by  the  several  States,  Virginia 
reserving  to  herself  at  any  time  to  withdraw 
from  the  Union,  and  what  Virginia  re 
served  all  the  States  had  a  right  to  reserve. 
Their  action  was  based  entirely  on  State 
rights.  The  Declaration  of  Independence 
states  who  is  to  be  the  judge  when  the  Gov- 


sonable  in  its  very  inception  and  organiza-   eminent  shall  be  subverted.     It  guarantees 


tion.     This 
the   issue. 


It 


to  the  very  foundation  of 
becomes  material    to  show 


what  these  principles  were.  It  is  important, 
further,  in  this  view:  they  call  members  of 
the  order  as  witnesses,  who  swear  that  this 
order  is  loyal  ;  that  there  is  no  harm  in  it, 
so  far  as  they  knew.  We  must  get  at  the 
foundation  of  their  belief,  to  judge  of  the 
credibility  and  force  of  their  testimony. 
Without  doing  this,  the  Commission  can 
not  judge  what  principles,  theories,  or  acts, 
they  believe  to  be  loyal,  and  what  disloyal. 

The  court  room  was  then  cleared  for  de 
liberation. 

On  reopening  the  Court,  the  Judge  Ad 
vocate  announced  that  the  objection  had 
been  overruled. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to 
meet  on  Wednesday,  November  23,  1804,  at 
9  o'clock,  A.  M. 


COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA, 

November  23,  186-1,  9  o'clock,  A.  M. 


to  the  people  the  right  of  revolution  when 
they  can  no  longer  tolerate  the  invasion  of 
their  rights.  I  do  not  mean  that  Governor 
Morton^  or  the  Legislature,  or  any  ma 
chinery  of  office,  getting  its  authority  from 
the  people  through  elections,  is  the  State. 
But  I  mean  the  free  range  of  all  its  people 
is  the  State.  The  officers  are  the  mere  ser 
vants  of  the  people,  the  mere  agents  of  the 
Government.  Where  does  sovereignty  rest? 
It  is  time  to  settle  this  question.  If  you 
are  wrong  in  your  theories,  you  should 
change  your  principles.  I  know  no  sover 
eignty  in  the  Federal  Government,  or  in 
the  State  Government,  as  contra-distin 
guished  from  the  people  of  the  State.  1  be 
lieve  in  the  doctrine  of  popular  sovereignty, 
instead  of  sovereignty  in  the  machinery  of 
the  Government." 

I  think  that  is  the  substance  of  what  Mr. 
Milligan  said  on  that  subject. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  this  portion  of  Mr. 
Milligan's  speech,  and  whether  it  is  cor 
rect? 

"If  we  have  no  power  to  make  war  upon 


The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  ad 
journment. 

All  the  members  present.  Also,  the 
Judge  Advocate,  -the  accused  (except  Wm. 
A.  Bowles),  and  their  counsel. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved.  I  ers  and  our  fathers    did  eighty  years  turo'.' 

The  examination  of  Samuel  F.   Winters,  |  Was   it  right?     How  many  believe  it  was 


a  State  that  secedes,  was  it  right  to  take  up 
arms  against  a  people  who  were  doing  Avhat 
they  contracted  to  do,  and  what  your  lath- 


a  witness  for  the  accused,  was  then  resumed, 
as  follows : 

I  can  not  state  when  and  where  the  Gov 
ernment  has  failed  to  execute  the  deci 
sion  of  the  Dred  Scott  case,  but  there  are 
personal  liberty  bills  or  statutes  in  most  of 
the  free  States,  which  are  a  nullification  of 
that  decision,  at  least  in  Wisconsin,  New 
York,  Vermont,  New  Hampshire,  Massa- 


right?  If  it  was  right,  shoulder  your  guns, 
and  go  forward,  and  don't  growl  about  the 
draft.'" 

In  speaking  of  the  draft,  I  think  he  said 
something  like  that;  that  if  the  war  was 
right,  the  draft  was  right;  that  the  burdens 
of  the  Government  should  rest  equally  upon 
all;  and  that  you  might  as  well  leave  it  to 
the  voluntary  act  of  citizens  to  raise  the 


176 


TREASON   TKIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


revenues  of  the  country,  as  to  raise  an 
army  by  volunteering,  or  something  like 
that ;  the  deductions  that  I  made  from  his 
speech  were  that  the  war  was  unconstitu 
tional. 

Q.  Did  he  use  these  words:  "Was  it  right 
because  you  were  more  peaceable  than  your 
neighboring  States,  and  unwilling  to  rebel, 
to  compel  them  by  force  of  arms  to  re 
main  your  partners  ?  When  you  have  an 
swered  that  question,  I  am  ready  to  talk 
about  the  draft."  Is  that  correct? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  corresponds  with 
my  report,  and  I  do  not  think  he  said  it. 
I  have  not  a  copy  of  the  paper,  in  which 
the  speech  was  reported,  with  me,  nor  do  I 
know  that  I  have  a  copy  on  file  at  my 
office.  Mr.  Milligan  has  occasionally  writ 
ten  communications  for  my  paper,  but  he 
has  never  written  any  of  its  leaders;  they 
were  letters  referring  to  local  matters.  He 
wrote  several  communications  last  winter, 
but  perhaps  not  more  than  a  dozen  alto 
gether.  I  was  present  at  the  Grand  Coun 
cil  that  met  here  on  the  17th.  I  went  to 
see  Mr.  Milligan  before  I  came  here;  I 
wanted  him  to  go  with  me,  but  he  felt  too 
sick.  I  brought  a  series  of  resolutions; 
they  were  given  me  by  Colonel  Milligan, 
but  I  did  not  see  them,  rior  did  I  read 
them;  certain  resolutions  were  read  at  the 
meeting  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty.  I  do  not 
know  in  whose  handwriting  they  were. 

[A  paper  containing  certain  resolutions 
was  here  handed  to  the  witness  by  the 
Judge  Advocate.] 

These  resolutions  were  adopted  at  Fort 
Wayne,  but  whether  or  not  these  are  the 
ones  I  brought  1  can  not  say.  These,  to 
the  best  of  my  recollection,  are  the  resolu 
tions  which  were  read  at  the  meeting  of 
the  Order  of  American  Knights. 

Government  exhibit  "A"  was  here  hand 
ed  to  the  witness  by  the  Judge  Advocate. 

Q,  Are  the  resolutions  in  this  book  the 
same  that  you  heard  read  at  the  February 
meeting  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty? 

A.  I  believe  they  are  the  same,  but  I 
could  not  state  positively  whether  they  are 
or  not* 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

The  resolutions  to  which  reference  has 
been  made,  that  were  read  at  the  Fort 
Wayne  meeting,  I  think,  are  nearly  like 
the  resolutions  of  the  llth  Democratic  Con 
gressional  Convention  assembled  at  Hun 
tington.  I  only  know  that  certain  resolu 
tions  were  contained  in  the  envelope  which 
Mr.  Milligan  handed  me,  and  I  know  that 
in  the  pamphlet  referred  to,  certain  resolu 
tions  are  printed  that  were  read  before  the 
Grand  Council,  but  I  can  not  say  positively 
that  they  are  the  same. 

G.  E.  CORLEW,  a  witness  for  the  accused 
was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly  sworn 
by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  follows 


I  reside  in  Huntington  county,  Indiana, 
nd  am  Deputy  Sheriff  in  that  county.  I 
lave  been  in  the  hardware  business.  I 
moved  to  Huntington  in  the  spring  of  1843, 
and  have  lived  there  since.  I  have  been 
,cquainted  with  Mr.  Milligan  for  the  past 
sixteen  years,  and  know  his  general  moral 
character  in  the  neighborhood  in  which  he 
ives;  I  should  call  it  good.  I  am  acquainted 
with  his  general  reputation  as  a  peaceable, 
orderly,  law-abiding  citizen,  and  it  is  good. 
I  joined  an  order  called  the  American 
Knights,  in  October  or  November,  of  1863, 
t  Huntington.  Mr.  Milligan  was  connected 
with  the  organization.  I  attended  most  of 
ts  meetings,  till  sometime  in  April,  1864, 
vhen  we  quit  meeting.  I  think  about 
twenty  or  twenty-five  belonged  to  it.  I 
never  knew  of  Mr.  Milligan  making  any 
efforts  to  increase  the  number  of  members, 
nor  was  he  in  favor  of  organizing  branch 
temples  throughout  the  country;  the  only 
members  that  he  seemed  willing  to  admit 
were  good,  reliable  and  responsible  men. 
As  far  as  I  understood  the  organization,  it 
was  entirely  political,  and  was  to  be  an  offset 
to  the  Union  League.  The  object  of  the 
organization  was  to  influence  elections,  and 
to  get  Democrats  to  stick  together,  so  as  to 
carry  elections,  and  not  by  force  of  arms  or 
any  thing  of  that  kind.  I  never  knew  any 
thing  as  to  its  military  organization. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  know  nothing  of  the  purposes  of  the 
order,  save  what  I  have  mentioned;  I  never 
heard  any  thing  about  arms  or  ammunition, 
nor  of  any  attempt  to  establish  a  North 
western  Confederacy.  I  joined  in  October 
or  November,  1863,  and  continued  a  mem 
ber  till"  it  was  broken  up,  in  March  or  April, 
1864.  I  think  1  took  three  degrees  in  the 
order,  but  I  never  attended  any  meetings, 
save  those  of  our  own  assembly.  For  a  part 
of  the  time  1  acted  as  treasurer,  and  re 
ceived  probably  fifty  or  sixty  dollars,  with 
which  1  bought  wood,  and  the  rest  had  to 
be  expended  in  the  rent  of  the  hall,  lights, 
etc.;  none  of  the  money  collected  was,  as 
far  as  I  know,  sent  to  the  Grand  Council. 
I  know  of  no  assessments  having  been  made 
on  our  members  for  money.  I  'know  noth 
ing  of  members  of  the  order  pledging  them 
selves  to  each  other  that  they  would  resist 
the  draft.  I  have  heard  other  individuals 
talking  about  it,  and  I  told  them  it  was 
nonsense  to  resist.  I  never  recollect  taking 
an  obligation  of  which  the  following  is  a 
part: 

"  I  do  further  promise  that  I  will,  at  all 
times,  if  needs  be,  take  up  arms  in  the  cause 
of  the  oppressed — in  my  country  first  of  all — 
against  any  monarch,  prince,  potentate, 
power,  or  government  usurped,  which  may 
be  found  in  arms,  and  waging  war  against  a 
people  or  peoples  who  are  endeavoring  to 
establish,  or  have  inaugurated,  a  govern- 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


177 


ment  for  themselves  of  their  own  free  choice, 
in  accordance  with,  and  founded  upon,  tht 
eternal  principles  of  truth,  which  I  have  sworn 
in  the  V ." 

I  will  not  swear  that  I  did  not  subscribe 
to  that  obligation,  but  I  do  not  remember. 
If  it  was  read  to  me,  I  swore  to  it. 

SAMUEL  F.  DAY,  a  witness  for  the  accused, 
was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly  sworn 
by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  follows: 
*I  reside  at  Huntington,  Indiana,  where  I 
have  lived  for  four  years.  I  am  engaged  in 
the  livery  business.  I  am  acquainted  with 
the  general  moral  character  of  Mr.  Milligan 
in  that  county,  and  it  is  good  as  far  as  I 
know.  I  am  acquainted  with  his  general 
reputation  as  a  peaceable,  orderly,  law-abid 
ing  citizen,  and  that  reputation  is  good. 

I  joined  a  secret  organization  last  Septem 
ber,  at  Iluntington,  about  the  time  Mr. 
Dodd  made  a  speech  there;  I  think  it  was 
called  the  Order  of  American  Knights.  We 
had  meetings  about  once  in  two  weeks  up 
to  the  time  we  sent  a  delegate  to  Indian 
apolis;  from  that  time  our  meetings  were 
irregular  until  March  or  April;  and  about 
the  last  of  April  the  organization  was  aban 
doned  from  want  of  interest  in  it  by  the 
members.  Between  twenty  and  thirty  be 
longed  to  it.  It  was  a  County  Temple.  I 
learned  from  Mr.  Dodd  that  the  organiza 
tion  was  a  political  one.  All  the  degrees  I 
ever  took,  I  took  the  first  night.  I  suppose 
there  were  three  degrees.  The  purpose  of 
the  organization,  it  was  stated,  was  to  con 
solidate  the  Democracy,  and  to  get  influen 
tial  men  into  its  ranks,  so  that  we  might 
influence  the  election,  and  carry  the  Demo 
cratic  ticket.  It  was  also  supposed  that  the 
organization  would  counteract  the  effect 
and  purposes  of  the  Loyal  League  in  that 
county.  I  never  learned  any  thing  of  the 
order  being  a  military  organization.  I  do 
not  know  of  any  attempts  of  Mr.  Milligan 
to  extend  the  order;  I  have  known  him  to 
blackball  members  to  keep  them  out,  and 
I  have  known  of  his  objecting  to  organizing 
branch  temples :  I  never  knew  of  his  assent 
ing  to  but  one,  namely,  at  Rockcreek  town 
ship,  Iluntington  county;  they  were  organ 
ized  there,  and  had  forty-five  or  fifty  mem 
bers. 

I  am  acquainted  with  Dr.  Zumro,  of 
Markle.  I  remember  a  conversation  I  had 
with  him  about  the  16th  of  September,  at 
Huntington.  He  and  Mr.  Johnson  came 
to  my  stable  door.  Mr.  Zumro  stepped  into 
my  office,  and  stated  that  he  had  just  come 
from  Mr.  Milligan's;  he  said  that  he  and 
Mr.  Johnson  were  appointed  to  come  over 
to  Iluntington,  to  see  what  was  to  be  done 
about  the  draft.  Zumro  said  that  'Mr.  Milli 
gan  did  not  give  him  much  encouragement 
as  he  was  sick,  and  told  him  to  go  to  me. 
Zumro  said,  "We  are  bound  to  resist  the 
draft,  and  we  want  to  know  if  you  can  give  j 
assistance."  I  said  it  was  foolishness  and  j 
12 


nonsense  to  resist  the  draft;  that  folks  were 
already  making  preparations  to  get  substi 
tutes.  We  talked  a  few  minutes,  and  when 
he  went  away,  he  said,  "I  suppose  we  will 
have  to  give  it  up,  as  we  can  get  no  encour 
agement  here."  I  do  not  remember  posi 
tively  whether  he  said  "we"  or  "they"  are 
bound  to  resist. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  was  elected  Grand  Seignior  of  the  or 
ganization,  and  served  for  two  or  three 
months.  The  man  who  preceded  me  was 
named  John  Jones,  but  no  one  was  elected 
to  succeed  me.  The  books  and  papers  of 
the  order  were  in  the  care  of  the  Secretary, 
Mr.  Cummings ;  Mr.  Corlew  was  Treasurer; 
I  do  not  know  what  became  of  the  papers. 
I  think  there  was  a  meeting  in  May,  but  I 
was  not  there.  Mr.  Milligan  never  gave 
any  reason,  that  I  remember,  for  not  wish 
ing  to  extend  the  order.  He  would  often 
say  when  asked  about  establishing  a  branch 
lodge,  "there  is  no  use,"  or  "do  not  be  in 
a  hurry."  and  the  probability  was  that  it 
would  not  be  done. 

I  never  heard  of  Mr.  Milligan  being  ap 
pointed  a  Major  General  in  the  order,  until  ' 
I  heard  it  on  the  street.  1  heard  nothing 
of  the  military  organization  of  the  order,  or 
of  its  army ;  Dodd  said  not  a  word  about  it; 
nor  was  any  thing  said  about  organizing  a 
North-western  Confederacy.  I  have  heard 
Mr.  Milligan  speak  in  the  lodge,  or  out  of 
it,  of  the  manner  of  conducting  the  war; 
and  he  approved  of  it,  if  it  was  conducted 
on  a  right  policy,  namely,  for  the  Union. 
He  objected  to  it,  so  I  understood,  because 
it  was  prosecuted  for  the  abolition  of  slavery, 
and  he  believes  that  the  tFnion  could  bo 
restored  by  better  means  than  by  war. 

When  Dr.  Zumro  said  "they"  or  "we" 
are  going  to  resist  the  draft,  Mr.  Johnson 
said  nothing  to  contradict  it,  that  I  remem 
ber.  I  think  Zumro  also  stated  that  Mr. 
Milligan  had  said  "  we  must  do  the  best  we 
can,"  or' something  to  the  effect  that  each 
one  would  have  to  take  care  of  himself,  and 
do  the  best  he  could;  but  he  did  not  say 
that  Mr.  Milligan  advised  him  to  resist. 

OCHMIG  BIRD,  a  witness  for  the-  accused, 
was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly  sworn 
by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  follows: 

I  reside  in  Allen  county,  Indiana,  and  am 
a  farmer.  I  am  a  member  of  the  Legislature. 
I  was  present  at  Fort  Wayne,  at  the  Demo 
cratic  Convention,  on  the  13th  of  August 
last,  at  which  Mr.  Milligan  spoke,  but  I  was 
not  by  Mr.  Milligan  all  the  time  he  was 
speaking.  It  was  called  a  mass  meeting  for 
the  people  of  the  county.  Mr.  Milligan  was 
one  of  the  invited  speakers.  Mr.  Milligan's 
was  an  argumentative  speech  on  the  sub 
ject  of  States  rights,  and  the  rights  of  the 
Constitution.  It  did  not  elicit  much  enthu 
siasm  from  the  audience.  I  judge  it  had 
an  adverse  tendency.  Mr.  Milligan  did  not 


178 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


denounce  the  Government,  but  he  did  speak 
against  the  Administration,  and  the  man 
ner  in  which  the  war  was  conducted ;  and 
I  understood  him  to  discriminate  between 
the  policy  of  the  Administration  and  the 
Government. 

I  took  one  degree  in  the  organization 
called  the  Sons  of  Liberty.  Its  purposes,  as 
I  understood  then,  were  to  rally  the  strength 
of  the  Democratic  party.  The  entire 
strength  of  the  order  might  have  numbered 
about  fifty  or  sixty  persons.  There  was  an 
impression  in  our  place  that  the  Loyal 
Leagues  were  armed.  We  found  some 
papers  that  they  had  dropped  around  re 
quiring  a  very  strict  organization;  it  was 
also  reported  that  they  intended  to  usurp 
unreasonable  authority  at  the  polls;  and 
one  of  the  objects  of  this  organization  was 
to  stand  by  and  see  that  the  people  had  a 
fair  chance  at  the  election,  and  that  no  in 
roads  were  made  oil  our  party  in  delivering 
their  votes. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

In  Mr.  Milligan's  argument  at  Fort 
Wayne,  as  I  understood  it,  he  did  not  just 
ify  the  States  in  the  right  to  secede.  His 
argument  went  to  prove  that  there  was  a 
certain  way  to  settle  these  things  peaceably 
between  the  States  and  the  Government. 
My  impression  is  that  he  did  not  consider 
this  a  constitutional  war,  from  the  manner 
in  which  it  was  conducted,  and  he  may 
have  said  that  the  war  itself  was  wrong — 
that  fighting  for  the  coercion  of  seceded 
States  was  unconstitutional,  but  I  am  not 
positive.  1  am  under  the  impression  that 
he  treated  the  States  as  already  out  of  the 
Union,  and  the  Union  dissolved;  but  I  did 
not  understand  him  to  say  that  there  was 
no  power  in  the  Government  to  bring  them 
back. 

I  do  not  know  that  I  have,  in  conversa 
tion,  expressed  the  view  that  a  State  had 
the  right  to  secede,  and  that  there  is  no 
power  in  the  Government  to  coerce  it  back 
after  having  seceded ;  those  are  not  my 
views.  I  think  it  possible  that  a  State  may 
be  coerced,  though  I  do  not  entirely  believe 
in  the  prosecution  of  the  present  war  for 
the  suppression  of  the  rebellion;  but  I  am 
in  favor  of  it  if  prosecuted  under  constitu 
tional  principles. 

Q.  What  would  be  a  constitutional  prose 
cution  of  this  war  ? 

Objected  to  by  the  accused,  for  the  rea 
son  that  the  politics  of  the  witness  are  riot 
a  subject  of  inquiry  before  this  Court, 

The  Judge  Advocate  replied: 

The  question  seems  to  me  to  be  relevant, 
and  most  material;  and  I  insist  upon  its 
being  put.  The  accused  bring  witnesses 
here  to  prove  a  good  character  for  loyalty, 
and  the  law-abiding  nature  and  conduct  of 
the  accused,  Mr.  Milligan.  If  they  saw 
proper  to  bring  upon  the  stand  a  member 


of  the  rebel  army,  and  ask  him  whether 
Mr.  Milligan  was  a  law-abiding,  loyal  man, 
his  test  of  loyalty  would  be  the  fact  that 
any  man  living  in  this  Government  would 
permit  those  States  to  secede,  and  establish 
a  Government  for  themselves,  and  not  in 
terfere  with  them. 

In  speaking  of  the  speech  at  Fort  Wayne, 
this  witness  states  that  Mr.  Milligan's  speech 
had  no  tendency  to  create  insurrection,  that 
it  separated  the  Government  from  the  Ad 
ministration,  etc.  The  only  way  to  get  at 
the  foundation  of  these  speeches  and  acts, 
is  to  find  the  basis,  or  premises,  from  which 
the  witnesses  drew  their  conclusions.  It  is, 
therefore,  important,  when  they  bring  wit 
nesses  upon  the  stand  to  prove  the  loyalty 
of  any  speech  or  act,  to  get  at  the  stand 
point  from  which  the  witness  himself  judges 
of  loyalty. 

This  question  goes  to  show  the  principles 
of  the  witness,  and  his  theories  of  Govern 
ment,  and  enables  the  Commission  to  find 
out  what  he  believes  to  be  constitutional, 
and  what,  in  his  judgment,  is  loyal,  and 
what  disloyal. 

The  court  room  was  then  cleared  for  de 
liberation. 

On  reopening  the  Court,  the  Judge  Ad 
vocate  announced  that  the  objection  was 
overruled. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned  to  2 
o'clock.  P.  M. 

AFTERNOON    SESSION. 

COVRT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,        ) 
November  23,  lt>f>4,  2  o'clock,  P.  M.  } 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

All  the  members  present.  Also,  the  Judge 
Advocate,  the  accused  (except  W.  A.  Bowles), 
and  their  counsel. 

The  testimony  of  Ochmig  Bird,  a  witness 
for  the  accused,  was  resumed,  as  follows: 

As  a  Democrat,  I  think  the  President  of 
the  United  States  has  exceeded  his  power 
in  requiring  the  abolition  of  slavery,  as  the 
right  to  hold  slaves  is  guaranteed  by  the 
Constitution  to  every  person  who  holds 
slaves.  1  think,  therefore,  the  Emancipa 
tion  Proclamation  is  unconstitutional ;  out 
side  of  this  proclamation  1  am  in  favor  of 
the  suppression  of  the  rebellion,  though  I 
am  by  no  means  strenuously  in  favor  of  the 
war,  for  I  believe  in  settling  the  difficulty 
by  conciliation  and  compromise.  I  am  not 
in  favor  of  letting  the  rebel  States  go,  but  I 
am  in  favor  of  the  union  of  all  the  States ; 
I  am  in  favor  of  prosecuting  the  war,  if  that 
is  the  only  alternative,  and  I  am  in  favor 
of  coercion,  if  that  be  necessary  for  the 
preservation  of  the  Union. 

We  had  a  Democratic  majority  of  twenty- 
seven  hundred  at  the  last  election  in  our 
county.  We  organized  this  society  to  pro 
tect  ourselves  against  the  Loyal  Leagues. 
Some  of  the  leading  members  who  belong 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


179 


to  the  organization,  are  Mr.  France,  who  is 
the  principal  officer,  Mr.  Dills,  Secretary, 
Mr.  Walkie,  Mr.  William  Jones,  Mr.  John 
Murray,  Mr.  Marshall  Noll,  Mr.  Hogan  and 
Mr.  James  W.  Borden. 

B.  F.  IBAOH,  a  witness  for  the  accused,  was 
then  introduced,  and,  being  duly  sworn  by 
the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  follows: 

I  reside  in  Huntington,  Indiana,  and 
have  lately  been  admitted  to  the  bar  in  our 
county.  1  joined  a  secret  political  organi 
zation*  in  September,  1803.  I  was  initiated 
on  the  day  that  Mr.  Dodd  addressed  the 
Democratic  Convention  at  Huntington. 
The  objects  of  the  organization  were  set 
forth  in  certain  declarations  of  principles 
which  were  read  to  us,  and  which  1  under 
stood  to  be  to  advance  Democratic  princi 
ples,  as  we  understood  them,  and  also  to 
counteract  the  influence  of  a  society  called 
the  Loyal  League.  It  was  a  purely  political 
organization.  I  continued  to  attend  its 
meetings  till  May;  at  that  time  it  had  died 
out  entirely.  In  connection  with  the  soci 
ety  of  American  Knights,  we  had  lectures 
every  two  weeks,  and  no  one  was  permitted 
to  lecture  unless  he  indorsed  the  declara 
tion  of  principles  taught  in  the-  order.  I 
was  a  delegate  from  that  county  temple  to 
the  Grand  Council  which  met  here  in  June. 
Mr.  Milligan  and  myself  came  together, 
but  he  did  not  accompany  me  to  the  Coun 
cil.  I  reached  the  city  a  little  before  noon 
on  the  first  day  of  the  meeting.  We  had  a 
meeting  on  that  and  the  next  day.  I  re 
member  at  this  meeting  a  young  man  from 
the  northern  part  of  the  State  was  very 
uneasy  about  the  draft,  and  thought  the 
order  should  do  something.  This  is  the 
first  I  learned  that  there  was  any  idea 
among  the  members  that  there  was  a  mili 
tary  part  connected  with  the  order;  he 
seemed  to  be  very  uneasy  about  the  draft, 
and  thought  that  we  ought  to  combine.  A  res 
olution  was  offered  by  some  member  of  the 
Council,  which  was  voted  down ;  the  reso 
lution  was  to  the  effect  that  the  different 
temples  in  the  counties  should  organize  for 
the  purpose  of  resisting  the  Government. 
It  created  quite  a  turbulent  time  there; 
some  thought  that  the  order  was  purely 
political,  and  others  that  there  was  a  mili 
tary  branch  in  it.  The  majority  of  the 
members  did  not  want  any  military  action, 
but -preferred  to  wait-  for  a  change  through 
the  ejection.  The  resolution,  I  remember, 
was  voted  down.  They  thought  the  ballot- 
box  was  the  remedy  for  our  troubles.  I  do 
not  remember  that  Mr.  Milligan  took 
any  part  in  the  discussion.  It  was  at  this 
meeting  that  Dodd,  or  the  Deputy  Grand 
Commander,  I  forget  which,  said  that  they 
had  taken  into  consideration  the  appoint 
ment  of  military  officers,  and  that  some  of 
those  appointed  had  not  accepted  their  of 
fices,  and  others  had  not  been  heard  from. 
There  was  then  a  discussion  whether  their 


action  should  be  secret,  and  confined  to  the 
Grand  Commander  and  themselves,  or 
whether  it  should  be  known  to  the  mem 
bers  generally.  Mr.  Dodd  said  there  were 
some  things  about  the  order  which  all  the 
members  need  not  know.  Others  said  that 
the  whole  Council  should  know  what  was 
done,  and  should  not  be  confined  to  single 
individuals.  Mr.  Dodd  said  that  the  ap 
pointment  of  major  generals  would  have  to 
remain  as  reported  until  the  4th  of  J  uly  : 
if  they  did  not  report  then,  others  would 
have  to  be  appointed.  Mr.  Dodd  did  not 
press  the  matter  then,  because  he  saw  it 
did  not  suit  the  Council,  and  that  they 
would  have  voted  the  military  part  of  it 
down. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  took  the  three  degrees  of  the  order  all 
at  one  time.  Part  of  the  degrees  were  not 
read;  only  the  obligations.  The  means  by 
which  Mr.  Milligan  and  myself  received 
notice  of  the  meeting  of  the  Council  here 
in  June  was  this :  a  notice  was  sent  to  the 
order  in  Huntington,  addressed  to  its  sec 
retary,  that  we  were  to  appoint  delegates  to 
that  meeting  of  the  Council.  This  was  re 
ceived  in  May,  and  we  came  up  here  to 
the  State  Council  on  the  14th  of  June.  We 
had  a  meeting  of  the  order  in  May,  and  I 
was  appointed  a  delegate,  and  though  our 
order  died  out  in  Huntington,  I  was  here 
on  the  14th  representing  it.  Mr.  Milligan 
was  present  at  the  first  day's  meeting.  Mr. 
Humphreys  I  did  not  see  here  either  day. 
I  do  not  remember  Mr.  Dodd  making  use  of 
any  such  expression  as  this:  "I  will  now 
kick  down  the  thin  walls  of  patriotism  and 
talk  treason  for  a  while."  I  remember  they 
had  quite  a  discussion  on  the  subject  of 
the  grievances  which  the  Government  had 
inflicted,  but  could  not  come  to  an  under 
standing  about  the  matter. 

The  ascendency  in  the  meeting  seemed 
to  be  of  those  who  concluded  that  we 
should  rely  on  the  ballot-box  as  a  remedy 
for  the  evils  we  suffered.  There  was  also 
some  expression  of  opinion  in  favor  of 
McClellan  as  candidate  for  the  Presidency; 
they  were  in  favor  of  the  nomination  of  a 
man  who  favored  the  prosecution  of  the 
war. 

Dodd  and  the  Deputy  Grand  Commander 
were  not  in  favor  of  the  prosecution  of  the 
war,  and  I  think  were  hostile  to  the  Admin 
istration.  I  think  from  what  Dodd  said, 
that  the  appointment  of  the  military  offi 
cers  was  within  his  province.  None  of  our 
organizations  drilled  as  far  as  I  know.  I 
had  a  preamble  for  organizing  a  company; 
the  list  had  fifteen  or  twenty  names  upon 
it,  some  of  whom  were  members  of  the 
order;  we  intended  getting  seventy-five 
members,  and  then  organizing  under  the 
State  law,  and  drawing  our  arms  from  the 
State,  in  accordance  with  an  act  of  the  Leg- 


180 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


islature;  my  name,  I  believe,  was  at  the 
head  of  the  company.  It  was  first  com 
menced  some  eighteen  months  back,  a  long 
time  before  I  belonged  to  any  secret  organ 
ization.  We  intended  to  drill;  our  object 
was  to  protect  ourselves  against  the  soldiers 
that  were  coming  home.  Some  citizens, 
also,  had  made  threats  against  our  printing 
office,  and  we  thought  it  best  to  take  the 
arms  in  our  own  hands.  Quite  a  number 
of  our  friends  had  received  letters  from 
soldiers  in  the  army,  saying  that  when  they 
came  home,  they  were  going  to  take  care  of 
what  they  were  pleased  to  term  the  Copper 
heads.  Another  reason  why  we  contem 
plated  protecting  ourselves  was  that  the 
Home  Guards  had  been  furnished  with  arms, 
and  we  thought  that  we  had  the  same 
right  to  the  State  arms  as  they  had.  Had 
we  been  furnished  with  arms,  our  company 
would  have  been  a  Home  Guard,  to  guard 
ourselves  against  what  we  called  encroach 
ments  on  our  rights. 

CAPTAIN  SAMUEL  PLACE,  jr.,  a  witness  for 
the  accused,  was  then  introduced,  and, 
being  duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate, 
testified  as  follows: 

I  am  Captain  in  the  5th  Veteran  Reserve 
Corps,  stationed  at  Burnside  Barracks,  In 
dianapolis.  I  was  in  command  of  the 
squad  of  men  who  arrested  Mr.  Milligan  at 
his  house  in  Huntington  county,  Indiana. 
I  made  the  arrest  on  the  authority  of  a 
written  order  from  Major  General  Alvin 
P.  Hovey,  which  was  as  follows  : 

HEADQUARTERS  DISTRICT  OF  INDIANA,         1 
Indianapolis,  October  5,  1864.  J 

Special  Order  No.  142. 

6.  Captain  Samuel  Place,  jr.,  5th  Eegt. 
V.  R.  C.,  with  the  force  under  his  command, 
will  proceed  to  Huntington,  Huntington 
county,  and  arrest  L.  P.  Milligan,  and  bring 
him  to  these  Headquarters  without  fail. 

By  order  of  Brevet  Major  General  Alvin 
P.  Hovey.  AND.  C.  KEMPER, 

Assistant  Adjutant  General. 

The  above  was  then  offered  in  evidence 
by  the  accused. 

G.  R.  Corlew,  a  witness  for  the  accused, 
was  then  recalled,  and  testified  as  fol 
lows: 

I  have  heard  Mr.  Milligan  say  that  he 
was  born  in  1812;  he  is  therefore  fifty-two 
years  old.  I  have  known  Mr.  Milligan  for 
sixteen  years,  and  I  never  knew  of  his 
being  in  the  military  or  naval  service  of  the 
United  States. 

MOSES  W.  MILLIGAN,  a  witness  for  the  ac 
cused,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being 
duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified 
as  follows : 

I  reside  in  Huntington,  Indiana,  and  am 
a  son  of  L.  P.  Milligan.  On  the  evening  of 
Tuesday,  the  16th  of  February,  my  father 
started  to  come  here  to  Indianapolis;  he 


went  to  the  train,  but  it  was  crowded,  and 
he  returned  home.  My  mother  asked  him 
the  reason  he  did  not  go,  and  he  said  he 
was  sick.  On  the  next  day,  the  17th,  he  was 
at  Court  at  Huntington.  My  father  was 
not  from  home  during  the  month  of  Feb 
ruary,  to  my  knowledge.  The  Common 
Pleas  Court  was  first  held,  and  the  Circuit 
Court  immediately  afterward ;  and  my  father 
was  in  attendance  during  both  terms,  as 
far  as  I  recollect.  I  was  present  at  both 
Courts  as  acting  bailiff. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  do  not  think  my  father  was  away  from 
Huntington  more  than  one  day  during  the 
month  of  February;  he  was  sick  more  or 
less  the  whole  month  of  February.  I  can 
not  state  what  he  was  doing  on  particular 
days.  I  am  enabled  to  fix  the  date  of  the 
16th  of  February,  by  knowing  that  a  meet 
ing  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty  was  to  be  held 
here  on  that  day,  and  that  my  father  in 
tended  to  be  present,  and  he  went  to  the 
cars  on  that  day.  I  remember  Mr.  Win 
ters  went. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
Friday,  November  25,  at  2  o'clock,  P.  M. 

COURT  BOOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         1 
November  25, 18G4,  2  o'clock,  P.  M.  J 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

All  the  members  present.  Also,  the  Judge 
Advocate,  the  accused,  and  their  counsel. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

EDWARD  PRICE,  a  witness  for  the  accused, 
was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly  sworn 
by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  follows: 

I  reside  at  Sullivan,  Sullivan  county,  In 
diana;  I  am  Clerk  of  the  Court  at  that 
place.  I  am  acquainted  with  the  accused, 
Andrew  Humphreys;  I  have  known  him 
about  twelve  years.  I  was  present  at  a 
meeting  at  a  place  called  Caledonia,  in  June, 
1863.  I  went  there  with  Mr.  Cowgill.  On 
the  morning  of  that  day,  two  or  three  citi 
zens  of  that  township  came  to  Sullivan  and 
requested  some  of  us  to  come  down  and  see 
if  we  could  not  quell  a  disturbance  that  was 
going  on  there ;  they  said,  "  Let  some  Dem 
ocrats  and  Republicans  go  out  and  talk  to 
the  crowd,  and  see  if  they  can  not  allay  the 
disturbance."  That  was  the  purpose  for 
which  I  went.  I  understood  the  excite 
ment  was  occasioned  by  some  soldiers,  who, 
getting  off  the  cars,  went  to  the  house  of  a 
Mr.  Wagner,  and  asked  for  his  horse.  Mr. 
Wagner  was  not  at  home,  and  his  wife  told 
them  they  could  not  have  it,  but  they  went 
into  the  stable  and  took  it.  They  also  shot 
at  a  man  by  the  name  of  Pigg-  When  I 
received  this  notice,  I  got  my  horse  and 
carriage  to  go  out  there.  Mr.  Cowgill,  who 
was  introduced  to  me  by  Mr.  Wolf,  the  old 
clerk  of  the  county,  went  with  me.  There 
were  two  or  three  carriage  loads  that  went, 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


181 


but  we  were  ahead  of  all  the  rest.  About 
a  mile  and  a  half  from  Sullivan  we  met  the 
soldiers  coming  back.  Mr.  Cowgill  stopped 
some  of  them  and  talked  for  a  few  minutes. 
He  asked  something  about  the  excitement. 
I  think  he  told  them  the  best  thing  they 
could  do  was  |o  go  on  to  Sullivan,  get  on 
the  cars  and  go  home.  I  think  he  also  told 
them  that  they  had  done  wrong  in  taking 
away  property  without  the  consent  of  the 
owners. 

We  went  on  to  Caledonia;  when  we  got 
there,  Mr.  Humphreys  was  speaking  to  the 
crowd ;  they  seemed  to  be  very  much  exci 
ted  when  we  drove  up.  I  don't  know  how 
many  there  were  present;  perhaps  about 
two  or  three  hundred.  I  got  out  of  the 
buggy  and  handed  the  lines  to  Mr.  Cowgill. 
I  went  up  to  Mr.  Humphreys  and  told  him 
that  the  Deputy  Provost  Marshal  was  there, 
and  asked  him  to  come  out,  and  I  would 
give  him  an  introduction.  He  stopped 
speaking  for  a  few  minutes,  and  I  went  out 
with  him  and  introduced  him  to  Mr.  Cow- 
gill;  they  walked  into  the  crowd  while  I 
was  hitching  the  horse.  Mr.  Humphreys 
spoke  a  little  while  to  the  crowd  after  that, 
and  then  introduced  Mr.  Cowgill ;  Mr.  Cow- 
gill  got  up  and  made  a  few  remarks,  advis 
ing  the  crowd  to  go  home  and  disperse,  that 
they  had  done  wrong  in  taking  the  prop 
erty,  and  told  them  the  best  thing  they 
could  do  was  to  take  Mr.  Humphreys'  ad 
vice  and  go  home,  and  not  be  the  cause  of 
making  any  disturbance.  Mr.  Humphreys 
said  that,  as  the  soldiers  were  gone,  there 
was  no  use  of  any  excitement,  and  that  the 
best  thing  they  could  do  was  to  go  home. 
I  was  walking  around  in  the  outskirts  of  the 
crowd,  and  was  not  paying  a  great  deal  of 
attention  to  what  he  did  say.  I  think  some 
of  the  crowd  said  they  would  follow  the 
soldiers ;  that  was  the  thing  Mr.  Humph 
reys  advised  them  not  to  do.  My  opportu 
nities  for  knowing  what  was  going  on,  were 
good,  as  I  was  in  the  crowd  all  the  time 
until  we  got  into  the  carriage  to  go  back. 
I  do  not  remember  Mr.  Humphreys  saying 
any  thing  about  the  Administration  or  the 
Government.  He  did  not  speak  more  than 
ten  or  fifteen  minutes  after  I  got  there. 

I  was  at  the  meeting  in  Jackson  town 
ship  in  the  September  of  1863.  Mr  Humph 
reys,  Mr.  Hammill,  Captain  Mandrell,  S.  G. 
Burton  and  myself,  spoke.  Captain  Man 
drell,  it  was  said,  was  a  rebel  that  had  been 
captured  at  Fort  Donelson,  and  had  taken 
the  oath  of  allegiance  at  Indianapolis.  It 
was  reported  that  he  had  been  engaged  here 
as  clerk  in  the  Quartermaster's  office.  He 
was  in  thje  Recorder's  office,  at  Terre  Haute, 
when  I  got  acquainted  with  him ;  and  he 
was  the  agent  for  some  Illinois  company  for 
awhile.  This  was  a  political  meeting — a 
Democratic  picnic. 

I  am  acquainted  with  the  moral  charac 
ter  of  Mr.  Humphreys,  and  it  is  good.  I 


am  also  acquainted  with  his  general  char 
acter,  as  a  law-abiding  man,  and  it  is  good. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  reside  twelve  or  fifteen  miles  from  Mr. 
Humphreys,  and  I  have  often  been  at  his 
house.  I  was  a  candidate  on  the  Demo 
cratic  ticket  in  the  fall  of  1863.  In  politics 
I  am  of  the  same  principles  as  Mr.  Humph 
reys,  and  my  speeches,  I  presume,  would  be 
of  the  same  class  as  his.  Captain  Mandrell, 
I  do  not  think,  spoke  more  than  live  min 
utes  at  the  meeting  I  have  alluded  to.  1 
do  not  remember  what  he  said.  Mr. 
Humphreys'  speech  was  about  like  Demo 
crats  usually  make.  As  I  was  a  candidate 
at  the  time,  I  did  not  pay  much  attention 
to  what  was  being  said;  I  was  more  inter 
ested  in  myself  than  any  body  else.  I 
joined  an  order  called  the  American 
Knights,  in  August,  1863.  I  was  initiated 
by  P.  C.  Wright,  at  Terre  Haute.  I  re 
mained  in  the  order  until  I  was  elected,  in 
October,  when  I  had  nothing  more  to  do 
with  it.  I  took  three  degrees.  I  joined 
the  order  for  fear  they  would  defeat  me.  I 
have  always  been  opposed  to  secret  political 
organizations,  not  thinking  that  they  were 
right,  and  I  might  have  done  what  1  be 
lieved  to  be  wrong,  for  the  sake  of  being 
elected. 

S.  G.  BURTON,  a  witness  for  the  accused, 
was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly  sworn 
by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  follows: 

I  reside  at  Sullivan,  Sullivan  county,  In 
diana,  and  practice  lawT  in  that  town.  I  am 
intimately  acquainted  with  Andrew  Hum 
phreys,  and  have  been  for  the  last  five  years. 
I  made  a  speech  at  Linton,  in  August  last. 
It  was  at  a  large  mass  meeting;  Mr.  Hum 
phreys  followed  me. 

Q.  You  may  state  the  substance  of  his 
speech,  if  you  recollect  it  ? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate,  and  withdrawn. 

Q.  In  the  course  of  that  speech,  what  did 
Mr.  Humphreys  say  in  relation  to  the  Gov 
ernment  and  the  right  of  secession  ? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  said : 

This  witness  is  brought  on  the  stand  to 
testify  in  behalf  of  the  accused,  Andrew 
Humphreys,  and  we  have  a  right  to  interro 
gate  him  as  to  Mr.  Humphreys'  speeches. 
That  course  of  examination  has  not  been 
objected  to,  up  to  this  time.  We  introduced 
three  gentlemen  from  Mr.  Humphreys' 
neighborhood.  One  of  them  testified  to 
the  speech  made  in  August  last.  We 
proved  that  speech  as  indicative  of  the 
sentiments  which  he  offered  to  the  people 
for  their  guidance.  We  have  a  right  to 
prove  what  the  accused  has  said,  urged  and 
enforced  upon  the  people  as  their  path  of 
duty ;  the  Court  may  determine  whether 
his  sentiments  were  loyal, 'or  disloyal.  We 


182 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


propose  to  prove  by  this  witness  that  he  is  a  question  on  which  there  has  been  some 

pursued  a  particular  line  of  argument.  That  difference  of  opinion." 

he  read  from  Washington's  Farewell  Address,  I     The  court  room  was  then  cleared  for  de- 

and  from  Jefferson's  writings,  to  enforce  the  |  liberation. 

same  views.      One  witness  stated  that  he!      On  reopening  the  Court,  the  Judge  Advo- 


understood  Mr.  Humphreys  endeavored  to 
support  his  argument  for  secession  by  the 
authority  of  Washington  and  Jefferson.  No 
principle  of  law  is  better  settled,  than  the 
right,  as  declared  in  the  Statutes  of  Indiana, 
that  a  party  may  always,  in  the  event  of  a 
witness  being  mistaken  in  his  deductions, 
of  having  his  errors  corrected  by  other  wit 
nesses.  If  one  witness  is  mistaken  in  a 
particular  point,  the  defendants  have  the 
right  to  prove  the  whole  facts  in  the  case 
by  another  witness,  that  the  Court  may  de 
termine  what  is  right  and  what  is  wrong. 
We  had  the  right,  first,  to  fortify  one  wit 
ness  by  corroborating  testimony  as  to  what 
Mr.  Humphreys  said,  and  show  that  all  he 
uttered  was  manifestly  in  favor  of  preserv 
ing  the  integrity  of  the  Government.  Sec 
ondly,  we  had  the  right  to  prove  what  act 
ually  took  place,  to  rectify  what  the  other 
witness  said  about  the  speech. 

One  of  the  charges  against  the  accused  is 
that  of  making  inflammatory  speeches.  We 
have  a  right  to  meet  and  to  disprove  this, 
and  the  law  fixes  no  limit  to  the  number  of 
the  witnesses  that  we  may  call. 

The  Judge  Advocate  replied:  I  under 
stand  the  rule  to  be,  that  when  they  prove 
any  particular  statement  to  have  been  made 
by  the  accused,  they  are  entitled  to  call  out 
the  entire,  statement.  The  Court  has  further 
ruled,  that  any  acts  or  speeches  made  by 
the  accused,  at  any  meetings  of  the  order, 
to  show  whether  such  acts  were  for  a  good 
or  bad  purpose,  would  be  received  as  evi 
dence;  but  I  do  not  understand  the  Court 
to  go  so  far  as  to  say  that  because  we  proved 
that  in  the  fall  of  1863,  certain  treasonable 
speeches  were  delivered  by  the  accused, 
that  they  can  introduce,  as  rebutting  testi 
mony,  loyal  speeches  made  in  1864.  We 
have  introduced  no  witnesses  as  to  speeches 
made  in  1864.  We  certainly  did  obtain 
from  one  witness  of  the  accused,  in  his  cross- 
examination,  that  Mr.  Humphreys,  in  1864, 
spoke  on  secession,  saying  that  a  State  had 
a  right  to  secede;  that  in  affirmation  of  his 
views  he  read  from  Washington's  Fareivell 
Address,  and  from  Jefferson's  writings.  They 
are  attempting  to  put  a  witness  on  the 
stand  to  testify  to  that  which  we  have  not 
introduced  on  the  part  of  the  Government. 
They  can  not  disprove  the  disloyal  utter 
ances  of  1863,  by  provi»g  loyal  speeches  in 
1864. 

As  to  when  one  witness  may  be  brought 
in  to  contradict  another,  Roscoe,  in  Crim 
inal  Evidence,  page  178,  says: 

'•Whether  the  party  calling  a  witness, 
who  gives  evidence  contrary  to  what  is  ex 
pected  from  him,  may  prove  contradictory 
statements  previously  made  by  the  witness, 


cate  announced  to  the  accused  that  the  ob 
jection  had  been  sustained. 

Question  by  the  accused: 

What  did  Mr.  Humphreys  say  in  that 
speech  about  secession? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate  as  illegitimate,  and  as  already  passed 
upon. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  replied  : 

On  the  discussion  of  the  right  of  seces 
sion,  a  man  may  speak  of  that  right  and 
aot  be  in  favor  of  it.  In  this  country,  it  is 
a  matter  of  opinion  whether  a  man  is  for 
nis  Government  or  against  it.  It  is  not 
:reason  to  maintain  one  side  or  the  other 
of  this  question  of  secession:  for  in  1825  a 
very  distinguished  lawyer,  who  was  long  a 
servant  of  the  Government,  wrote  a  treatise 
on  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States, 
n  which  he  justified  and  maintained  the 
right  of  States  to  secede,  under  the  Consti- 
:ution,  and  denied  the  right  of  coercion. 
[  always  thought,  and  I  think  so  still,  that 
:his  gentleman,  Mr.  Eowle,  of  Pennsylvania, 
was  greatly  mistaken.  But  no  man  doubt 
ed  the  loyalty  of  his  heart  or  his  life,  until 
the  days  when  treason  was  inaugurated  in 
this  country. 

Do  Tocqueville,  in  his  Democracy  in  Amer 
ica,  maintains  it  as  an  original  proposi 
tion,  that  there  can  be  no  contest  for  the* 
enforcement  of  the  Union;  that  it  is  not 
a  contest  between  the  Government  on  the 
one  side  and  the  seceding  State  or  States 
on  the  other;  but  that  States  seceding  have 
the  same  interest  to  maintain  secession, 
that  the  adhering  States  have  to  resist  it, 
because  it  is  a  question  of  self-interest  to 
each  party.  The  General  Government  is 
dissolved. 

We  claim  that  we  have  the  right  to  in 
troduce  testimony  to  show  the  loyalty  of 
Mr.  Humphreys,  from  the  present  time  back 
to  the  organization  of  the  orderr  at  Terre 
Haute,  as  the  testimony  on  the  part  of  the 
Government  goes  back  to  this  time. 

The  case  of  Home  Tooke  is  to  the  point. 
He  was  on  trial  for  treason.  He  goes  far 
back  of  the  commencement  of  the  prose 
cution,  and  finds  a  book  that  he  had  writ 
ten  in  favor  of  the  sovereign.  In  that  book 
his  loyalty  is  fully  established,  and  he  in 
troduces  it  to  show  that  he  could  not  have 
had  the  intent,  as  alleged,  of  destroying 
the  life  of  the  King.  It  was  admitted  as 
evidence  in  his  favor,  and  though  Lord 
Ellenborough  afterward  questioned  the  cor 
rectness  of  the  decision,  it  has  not  been 
reversed.  It  followed  and  reversed  the  de 
cision  in  the  case  of  Lord  George  Gordon, 
the  decision  in  Lord  George  Gordon's  case 
being  decided  in  1780,  and  the  trial  of 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


183 


Home  Tooke  following  fully  fourteen  years 
after,  during  the  turbulent  scenes  of  the 
French  Revolution. 

The  folio  win  a  is  from  Russell  on  Crimes, 
vol.  2,  pp.  780-781 : 

"And,  as  in  trials  for  conspiracies,  what 
ever  the  prisoner  may  have  done  or  said, 
at  any  meeting  alleged  to  be  held  in  pur 
suance  of  the  conspiracy,  is  admissible  in 
evidence  against  him,  on  the  part  of  the 
prosecution;  so,  on  the  other  hand,  any 
other  part  of  his  conduct  at  the  same 
meetings  will  be  allowed  to  be  proved  on 
his  behalf;  for  the  intention  and  design  of 
a  party,  at  a  particular  time,  are  best  ex 
plained  by  a  complete  view  of  every  part 
of  his  conduct  at  that  time,  and  not  merely 
from  the  proof  of  a  single  and  insulated  act 
or  declaration.  In  the  case  of  Walker  and 
others,  who  were  tried  for  a  conspiracy  to 
overthrow  the  Government,  evidence  was 
produced  on  the  part  of  the  prosecution 
to  show  that  the  conspiracy  existed,  and 
was  brought  into  overt  acts  at  meetings  in 
the  presence  of  Walker,  the  counsel  for 
the  prisoners  was  allowed  to  ask  a  witness, 
whether,  at  any  of  these  times,  he  had 
ever  heard  Walker  utter  any  word  incon 
sistent  with  the  duty  of  a  good  subject? 
The  question  was  opposed,  but  held  by  Mr. 
J.  Heath  to  be  admissible.  The  prisoner's 
counsel  were  also  allowed,  in  the  same 
case,  to  inquire  into  the  general  declara 
tions  of  the  prisoner  at  these  meetings, 
whether  the  witness  had  heard  him  say 
any  thing  that  had  a  tendency  to  disturb 
the  peace  of  the  kingdom ;  and  questions 
to  the  same  effect  \vere  put  to  many  other 
witnesses  in  succession. 

"On  the  trial  of  Hardy  for  high  treason, 
where  the  overt  act  charged  was  that  the 
prisoner,  for  the  purpose  of  accomplishing 
the  treason  of  compassing  the  King's  death, 
did  conspire  with  others  to  call  a  conven 
tion  of  the  people,  in  order  that  the  con 
vention  might  depose  the  King,  the  coun 
sel  for  the  prisoner  were  allowed  to  ask  a 
witness,  whether,  before  the  time  of  the 
convention,  he  had  ever  heard  from  him 
what  his  objects  were,  and  whether  he  had 
at  all  mixed  himself  in  that  business.  But 
the  better  opinion  seems  to  be,  that  in  or 
der  to  make  such  other  acts  or  declarations 
of  the  prisoner  applicable  to  his  defense,  it 
must  be  shown  that  they  are  in  some  way 
connected  with  the  facts  that  are  proved 
against  him.  In  the  case  of  Home  Tooke 
and  others,  however,  for  high  treason,  sev 
eral  publications  having  been  given  in  evi 
dence  on  the  part  of  the  crown,  containing 
republican  doctrines  and  opinions,  the  dis 
tribution  of  which  had  been  promoted  by 
the  prisoners,  during  the  period  assigned  in 
the  indictment  for  the  existence  of  the 
conspiracy,  the  prisoner  was  allowed  to 
read,  in  his  defense,  various  extracts  from 
works  which  he  had  published  at  a  former 


period  of  his  life ;  and  these  the  jury  were 
permitted  to  carry  along  with  them,  when 
they  retired  to  consider  their  verdict.  But 
the  propriety  of  allowing  such  a  defense 
has  been  questioned  by  very  high  au 
thority." 

The  first  question  we  present  to  the 
Court  is,  whether  we  have  a  right  to  prove 
by  this  witness  that  facts  were  different 
from  what  the  other  witness  said  they 
were.  On  that  question  I  wish  to  cite  au 
thority.  We  called  Mr.  Johnson's  atten 
tion  to  the  meeting  and  the  sentiments 
expressed  by  Mr.  Humphreys  about  the 
Government.  The  witness  stated  that  Mr. 
Humphreys  made  a  speech.  The  Judge 
Advocate  asked  if  he  spoke  in  favor  of  the 
right  of  secession?  He  answered,  he  did. 
We  now  introduce  a  witness  who  made  a 
speech  at  the  same  time  and  place,  and 
who  heard  what  Mr.  Humphreys  said.  We 
introduce  him  not  to  contradict  what  other 
witnesses  have  said,  but  to  show  the  real 
facts  of  the  case. 

Roscoe  says,  page  178: 

"But  where  a  witness  is  called  and 
makes  statements  contrary  to  those  which 
are  expected  from  him,  the  party  calling 
him  may  prove  the  facts  in  question  by 
other  witnesses."  But  it  is  stated  that  this 
decision  applies  only  to  the  direct  examin 
ation.  It  is  not  limited  to  that.  In  exam 
inations  as  to  character,  we  are  confined  to 
two  questions.  In  cross-examination  we 
are  not  so  limited.  Suppose  on  re-examin 
ation,  a  witness  clings  to  a  mistake  made 
in  his  direct  examination,  and  we  could  pro 
duce  a  hundred  witnesses  to  prove  a  con 
trary  state  of  facts,  should  we  be  bound  by 
his  statements,  and  cut  off  from  correcting 
his  mistake  ?  If  so,  no  man  would  be  safe 
in  introducing  witnesses  as  to  character. 

Eminent  authorities  say  on  this  point: 

"  Where  a  witness  gives  evidence  against 
the  party  calling  him,  and  is  an  unwilling 
witness,  or  in  the  interest  of  the  opposite 
party,  he  may  be  asked  by  the  party  calling 
him,  at  the  discretion  of  the  Court,  whether 
he  has  not  on  a  former  occasion  given  dif 
ferent  testimony  as  to  a  particular  fact. 
Bank  Northern  Liberties  vs.  Davis,  6  Watts  & 
Serg.,  285. 

"A  party  may  prove  the  fact  to  be  dif 
ferent  from  what  one  of  his  own  witnesses 
has  stated  it  to  be.  That  is  not  discrediting 
his  witness.  Spencer  vs.  White,  1  IredelCs  N. 
O.  Rep.,  236. 

"A  party  can  not  discredit  his  own  wit 
ness  or  show  his  incompetency,  though  he 
may  call  other  witnesses  to  contradict  him 
as  to  a  fact  material  to  the  issue,  in  order  to 
show  how  the  fact  really  is.  Franklin  Bank 
vs.  Steam  Nav.  Co.,  11  Gill  &  Johns.,  28." 

The  same  principle  was  decided  in  the 
case  of  Wright  vs.  Beckett,  1  Moore  &  R.<  416,  in 
which  Lord  Denman  held  that  a  party  call 
ing  a  witness,  who,  on  cross-examination, 


184 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


has  given  testimony  unfavorable  to  him, 
may,  on  re-examination,  ask  the  witness 
questions  to  show  inducements  to  betray 
him.  *  *  *  An  opinion  adverse  to  the 
right  of  a  party  calling  a  witness  to  con 
tradict  him,  by  his  own  previous  statement, 
has  been  expressed  by  a  writer  of  great 
authority.  Phill.  Ev.,  309,  1th  ed.  And  this, 


what  he  said  in  Lin  ton,  about  the  Union 
and  Government.  The  Government  has 
admitted  evidence  in  reference  to  that  meet 
ing  without  objection,  and,  therefore,  the 
whole  of  the  facts  in  reference  to  it  should 
come  before  the  Court.  It  is  necessary  that 
we  be  permitted  to  introduce  other  witnesses 
to  show  what  Mr.  Humphreys  said  in  that 

the  opinion,  seems  to  have  been  followed  by  [  speech.  If  we  can  do  this,  it  wil1  enable  us 
other  text-writers.  Mr.  Phillips,  however,  [  to  correct  any  wrong  impression  \vhich  may 
in  the  last  editions  of  his  work  appears  to |  have  arisen  from  the  answer,  "Yes,  sir,"  to 
have  changed  his  opinion,  and  observes  that  [  the  question,  uDid  he  say  secession  was 
in  the  administration  of  criminal  justice  jught?"  Now,  in  the  present  state  of  the 
more  especially,  the  exclusion  of  the  proof  \  country,  such  a  declaration  would  not  be 
of  contrary  statements  might  be  attended  expected  to  come  from  a  loyal  source,  but 
with  the  worst  consequences.  Phill.  on  Ev  ,  would  be  considered  disloyal,  and  showing 
pp.  451,  9?A  ed.  I  a  disposition  to  enter  into  such  an  associa- 

I  know  that  the  Indiana  Statutes  are  not  I  tion  as  this  secret  order  has  been  claimed 


authority  in  this  Court,  but  its  practice  is 
supposed  to  be  in  harmony  with  the  com 
mon  law  on  these  questions,  and  in  con 
formity  with  the  principles  of  humanity  on 
which  our  Statutes  are  based. 

Section  244,  of  Part  1,  page  172,  reads: 


to  be. 

The  Judge  Advocate  replied: 

I  desire  to  correct  a  misapprehension, 
frequently  entertained,  and  which  appears 
to  exist  here,  that  the  Judge  Advocate  is 
counsel  for  the  accused  as  well  as  for  the 


" The  party  producing  a  witness  shall  not ;  Government,  His  position  is  exactly  de- 
be  allowed  to  impeach  his  credit  by  evi-  j  fined  by  the  Articles  of  War,  which  say  that 
dence  of  bad  character,  unless  it  was  indis-jhe  "shall  so  far  consider  himself  as  counsel 
pensable  that  the  party  should  produce  him,  I  for  the  prisoner,  after  the  said  prisoner  shall 
or  in  case  of  manifest  surprise  when  the)  have  made  his  plea,  as  to  object  to  any  lead- 
party  shall  have  this  right;  but  he  may, !  ing  question  to  any  of  the  witnesses,  or  any 
in  all  cases,  contradict  him  by  other  evi- 1  question  to  the  prisoner,  the  answer  to  which 
dence,  and  by  showing  that  he  has  made  I  may  tend  to  criminate  himself."  When  the 
statements  different  from  his  present  testi- 1  accused  came  into  Court  ably  represented 
mony."  by  counsel,  I  feel  that  the  defense  of  the 

The  foot-notes  to  that  section  contain  the  j  accused  rests  upon  their  shoulders,  rather 
following  decisions:  I  than  on  mine.  I  do  not  act  as  counsel  for 

"The  rule  of  common  law  is  thus  stated  [the  accused  in  this  case.  On  all  questions 
in  Thompson  vs.  Blanchard,  4  Comstock,  303.  A  j  of  law,  1  put  them  on  an  equal  footing  with 
party  calling  a  witness  can  not  impeach  his!  the  Government,  but  in  questions  of  fact.  I 
character  or  assail  his  credibility  by  general  -act  only  for  the  Government,  and  leave  the 
evidence;  but  he  may  prove  by  other  evi-! accused  in  the  hands  of  their  counsel. 


dence  the  truth  of  any  particular  fact  in 
direct  contradiction  to  the  testimony  of  the 
witness." 


I   had  supposed    that  the  point  at  issue 
was  already  disposed  of  by  the  decision  of 
this  Court.     Its  ruling  I  understood  to  be, 
"The  right  of  a  party  to  contradict  his  own  |  that   what   a  man  says,  any  statement  he 
witness,  by  showing  that  he  has  made  state-!  makes  outside  of  the  particular  times  and 
ments  different  from  his  present  testimony  places  proved  by  the  Government,  whether 
(Civil  Code,  Sec.  660,)  does  not  depend  on  the  said  to  one  person,  or  a  hundred,  is  i m ma- 
ability  of  the  party  to  prove,  in  addition,  that  I  terial,  and  every  sentence  of  law,  read  by 


the  testimony  of  the  witness  is  untrue;  but 
he  may  contradict  him,  first,  by  other  evi 
dence  ;  and,  secondly,  by  showing  that  he  has 
made  statements  different  from  his  present 
testimony.  Either  or  both  of  these  modes 
may  be  adopted.  Champ,  vs.  Commonwealth, 
2  Metcalf.  (Ky).  17." 

We  were  surprised  by  the  testimony  of 
this  witness  on  the  point  of  secession. 


the  accused,  goes  to  this,  and  only  this  ex- 
tent,  that  all  the  prisoner  said  at  the  par 
ticular  time  proven  by  the  Government,  or 
while  he  was  engaged  in  those  particular 
proven  acts,  is  competent.  He  can  not  go 
outside  of  that. 

Permit  me  to  say  one  word  on  the  doc 
trine  of  the  right  of  a  State  to  secede,  which 
is  spoken  of  as  only  a  political  heresy.  It 


In  reviewing  the  whole  case,  it  seems  that  is  the  heresy  that  has  made  a  part  of  our 
the  public  life  of  Mr.  Humphreys,  for  the  land  desolate.  It  is  the  phantom  that  has 
time  covered  by  the  examination  on  the 'swept  over  one-half  of  the  surface  of  our 
part  of  the  Government,  is  on  trial  before  j  beloved  country,  leaving  ruin  in  its  wake, 
this  Court,  and  that  whatever  has  been  done|  It  has  caused  moaning  and  mourning 
or  said  at  public  meetings  by  him  during!  throughout  the  whole  land.  Whether  it  is 
that  period  is  part  of  the  re-s  gesla  in  this  \  treason  or  not,  it  has  caused  the  treason 
offense.  Therefore,  we  think  we  are  right  against  which  the  nation  is  now  struggling. 
in  attempting  to  introduce  evidence  to  show  This  heresy  contains  the  doctrine  and  prin- 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


185 


ciples,  which,  once  acted  on,  constitute  trea-|than  to  first  degree  members;  I  understood 


son.  You  may  advocate  the  right  of  seces 
sion  as  a  principle,  and  the  moment  you 
convince  enough  people  of  the  truth  of  that 
principle,  it  ripens  into  action,  and  you  pro 
duce  secession  and  disrupt  the  Government. 
When  you  convince  a  sufficient  number  of 
the  people  of  Indiana  that  secession  is 
right,  and  that  there  is  no  power  in  the 
Government  to  coerce  them,  and  prove  to 
them  that  a  North-western  Confederacy  is 
to  their  advantage,  you  lead  them  to  actual 
treason.,  and  pave  the  way  for  a  division  of 
the  Government,  to  any  extent  that  inter 
est  or  caprice  may  dictate.  From  this  her 
esy  have  culminated  the  wrongs  under 
which  the  nation  is  now  groaning.  Hence, 
I  dislike  to  hear  counsel  argue  that  a  man 
has  the  right  to  talk  in  favor  of  secession, 
and  claim  that  it  is  not  wrong,  or  treason. 
He  argued  that  Mr.  Rawle  had  advocated 
the  right  of  secession,  and  no  man  doubted 
his  loyalty.  But  he  did  not  believe  this 
was  treason,  and  did  not  know  that  it  would 
be  against  Mr.  Humphreys,  that  he  argued 
in  favor  of  this  doctrine.  If  so,  why  does 
he  try  to  rebut  the  remark  of  the  witness 


that   Mr.   Humphreys 
right?     This   doctrine 


said   secession    was 
is    the    foundation- 


stone  on  which  treason  is  built.  The  ques 
tion  is,  whether  he  joined  a  treasonable  so 
ciety  which  had  avowed  its  intention  to 
disrupt  the  Government;  which  conspired 
for  the  establishment  of  a  North-western 
Confederacy,  and  proposed  to  seize  the  ar 
senals  in  the  North-western  States,  release 
the  rebel  prisoners,  and  arm  them  to  aid  in 
this  conspiracy;  whether  he  had  any  knowl 
edge  of  these  purposes,  and  whether  he 
was,  by  his  membership  and  position,  bound 
to  assist  in  carrying  out  what  this  organiza 
tion  contemplated.  They  can  not  disprove 
this  fact,  or  rebut  its  force,  by  proving  that 
at  another  time,  outside  of  the  order,  he 
made  loyal  speeches. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  joined  a  society  called  the  Sons  of  Lib 
erty,  at  Terre  Haute,  in  August,  1863,  and 
took  three  degrees.  I  have  not  met  with 
the  order  for  about  six  months.  I  was 
called  Ancient  Brother  in  the  order;  the 
principal  duty  of  which  office  was  to  admin 
ister  the  obligations. 

KE-EXAMINATION. 

I  regarded  this  organization  as  having 
only  a  political  object.  I  thought  I  under 
stood  all  about  it,  but  since  these  trials 
commenced,  matters  have  been  developed 
of  which  I  knew  nothing  before.  Although 
I  have  conversed  with  members  of  the  or 
der  outside  of  my  own  county,  I  never  was 
able  to  ascertain  that  its  designs  were  any 
other  than  to  secure  a  better  organization 
of  the  Democratic  party;  and  I  never  knew 
of  any  thing  more  being  revealed  to  third 


that  the  objects  of  the  order  were  to  be 
secured  through  the  means  of  the  ballot- 
box. 

RE-CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  had  in  my  possession  the  ritual  of  the 
order.  x  The  ritual  of  the  first  degree  I  have 
read. 

The  attention  of  the  witness  was  called 
by  the  Judge  Advocate  to  the  following 
passage,  which  he  was  asked  to  explain : 

"10.  Whenever  the  officials,  to  whom  the 
people  have  intrusted  the  powers  of  the 
Government,  shall  refuse  to  administer  it  in 
strict  accordance  with  its  Constitution,  and 
shall  assume  and  exercise  power  not  dele 
gated,  it  is  the  inherent  right  and  impera 
tive  duty  of  the  people  to  resist  such  of 
ficials,  and,  if  need  be,  expel  them  by  force 
of  arms.  Such  resistance  is  not  revolution, 
but  solely  the  assertion  of  right." 

That  has  reference  to  counter  revolution. 
When  the  political  party  in  power  begins  to 
trample  on  the  rights  of  other  , citizens, 
these  can  take  their  rights  in  their  own 
hands,  and  defend  them  by  force  of  arms. 
My  idea  is,  that  it  is  right  for  every  Ameri 
can  citizen  to  defend  his  rights  by  force 
when  they  are  trampled  upon,  and  it  was 
one  of  the  purposes  of  the  order,  that  in 
case  of  such  encroachments,  it  should  resist 
by  force  of  arms.  They  had  apprehensions 


that 


ballot-box   would   be    interfered 


with,  and,  in  case  they  were  driven  from 
the  ballot-box,  it  was  their  right  to  secure  a 
free  election  by  force  of  arms.  If  one  class 
was  driven  from  the  polls  to  obtain  the  tri 
umph  of  the  other  party,  it  was  right  for 
the  party  driven  away  to  take  up  arms,  and 
I  suppose  the  passage  quoted  has  reference 
to  that,  if  such  a  state  of  things  should 
arise.  The  passage  has  reference  to  the 
exercise  of  powers  not  delegated;  and  I 
claim  that  the  Government  has  assumed 
powers  not  delegated,  and  I  suppose  the 
order  claims  the  same.  I  believe  it  was  one 
of  its  principles  that  the  Government  had 
assumed  too  much  power. 

WILLIS  G.  NEFF,  a  witness  for  the  accused, 
was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly  sworn 
by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  follows : 

I  reside  at  Sullivan,  Indiana,  and  am  en 
gaged  in  the  practice  of  law.  I  know  Cap 
tain  Mandrell,  who  has  been  spoken  of  in 
this  case.  I  met  him  at  Terre  Haute,  in 
the  spring,  in  the  Clerk's  ofiice,  after  the 
battle  of  Fort  Dorielson,  and  had  some  con 
versation  with  him.  He  then  told  me  he  was 
released  on  taking  the  oath  of  allegiance. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
Monday,  November  28,  at  2  o'clock,  P.  M. 

In  consequence  of  the  absence  of  some 
of  the  members,  the  Commission  adjourned 
over  the  28th  and  29th,  to  meet  on  Wednes 
day,  November  30,  at  2  o'clock,  P.  M. 


186 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,        \ 
November  30,  1864,  2  o'clock,  P.  M.  J 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

All  the  members  present.  Also,  the  Judge 
Advocate,  the  accused  (except  W.A.Bowles), 
and  their  counsel. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

JOHN  ROACH,  a  witness  for  the  accused, 
was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly  sworn 
by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  fol 
lows  : 

I  live  at  Huntington,  where  I  have  lived 
for  thirty  years ;  I  am  a  farmer.  I  am  well 
acquainted  with  the  people  living  near 
Huntington.  I  have  known  Mr.  Milligan 
since  1847  or  1848.  He  has  been  my  at 
torney  for  several  years.  1  am  acquainted 
with  his  moral  character  in  the  community 
in  which  he  lives,  and  it  is  good.  His  gen 
eral  reputation  as  an  orderly,  peaceable, 
law-abiding  citizen,  is  good.  I  never  joined 
any  secret  organization. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

Since  1854  or  1856  I  have  acted  with  the 
Democratic  party,  though  not  actively.  I 
have  never  acted  with  the  Republican 
partjr.  I  have  heard  Mr.  Milligan  make  re 
marks,  in  which  he  held  that  some  of  the 
officers  of  the  Government  were  exceeding 
their  authority,  and  he  complained  that 
they  were  not  acting  according  to  law.  I 
never  heard  him  speak  of  the  executive 
officers  of  the  Government  as  usurpers.  1 
have  never  heard  people  of  our  community 
speak  of  him  as  a  disloyal  man.  I  do 
not  think  they  regard  him  as  more  disloyal 
than  other  Democrats.  Some  of  our  citi 
zens  believed  that  every  one  who  did  not 
vote  the  Republican  ticket  was  disloyal.  I 
believe  Mr.  Milligan  has  been  regarded  as 
a  leader  of  the  peace  wing  of  the  Demo 
cratic  party.  I  have  heard  him  spoken  of 
as  a  a  Butternut,"  but  I  have  not  heard  of 
him  working  against  the  Government  in  her 
efforts  to  suppress  this  rebellion.  Mr.  Mil 
ligan,  I  believe,  has  a  worse  reputation,  per 
haps,  than  other  Democrats,  because  he 
has  worked  with  more  earnestness  than 
others  of  the  peace  party. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Though  I  have  voted  with  the  Democratic 
party,  I  have  assisted  the  Government  in 
aiding  in  the  enlistment  of  soldiers,  and  I 
have  helped  soldiers'  families.  As  one  of 
the  largest  tax  payers  of  the  county,  I  have 
gone  before  the  board  of  County  Commis 
sioners  and  asked  them  to  make  appropria 
tions  to  encourage  enlistments,  and  for  the 
support  of  soldiers'  families. 

WILSON  B.  LOCKRIDGE,  a  witness  for  the 
accused,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being 
duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testi 
fied  as  follows : 

I  reside  in  Peru,  Miami  county,  Indiana, 


and  am  now  and  have  been,  for  the  last  two 
years,  a  lawyer.  I  am  now  the  editor  of 
the  Miami  County  Sentinel — a  Democratic 
paper.  I  have  acted  as  Judge  of  the  Court 
of  Common  Pleas  for  two  terms.  I  have 
been  intimately  acquainted  with  Mr.  Milli 
gan  since  1847  or  1848.  I  was  two  years  a 
partner  of  his.  I  am  acquainted  with  his 
genei  al  moral  character  in  the  community 
in  which  he  lives,  and  it  is  good.  I  am  also 
acquainted  with  his  general  reputation  as  a 
peaceable,  orderly,  law-abiding  citizen,  and 
it  is  good.  I  was,  for  a  short  time,  a  mem 
ber  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty.  I  was  inform 
ally  initiated,  and  only  attended  one  or  two 
meetings. 

I  attended  a  Council  of  the  organization 
in  this  city  in  February  last.  I  understood 
that  the  intention  of  the  organization  was 
altogether  political;  that  it  was  intended 
to- protect  the  members  of  the  Democratic 
'party  against  violence,  which,  itrwas  thought, 
had  been  used  against  them  in  particular 
quarters;  in  short,  to  protect  the  Demo 
cratic  party  and  see  that  their  rights  were 
not  trampled  upon.  Mr.  Milligan  was 
not  present  at  the  Council  in  February 
while  I  was  there,  which  was  the  first  day. 
1  looked  for  him  in  the  meeting,  and  heard 
one  of  the  prominent  members  inquire  for 
u Milligan;"  the  reply  was  that  he  was  not 
there.  There  was  nothing  said  about  the 
appointment  of  Major  Generals  while  I  was 
there.  I  had  not  a  great  deal  of  faith  in 
the  matter.  I  did  not  know  it  to  be  what 
it  purported  to  be,  and  I  came  to  Indian 
apolis  more  for  the  purpose  of  seeing  into 
it  than  for  any  thing  else,  and  from  those  I 
saw  in  attendance  that  day,  I  concluded 
that  it  would  not  be  productive  of  much 
good  After  returning  home,  I  had  nothing 
more  to  do  with  it. 

Dodd  and  Heffren  were  the  principal 
leaders,  and  I  did  not  think  they  were  fit 
persons  to  take  part  in  such  a  thing. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  understood  that  we  were  to  protect  the 
rights  of  the  Democratic  party,  in  the  event 
of  their  being  kept  away  from  the  polls, 
with  such  means  as  were  necessary  to  afford 
us  protection.  We  were  first  to  exhaust 
all  peaceable  means,  and  if  these  failed,  to 
resort  to  the  right  of  self-defense.  I  do  not 
know  that  any  precise  means  were  deter 
mined  upon.  Each  member  of  the  order 
had  to  judge  of  his  own  rights  and  the  best 
means  to  maintain  them,  and  when  any 
member's  rights  were  infringed  upon,  it 
was  regarded  as  the  duty  of  other  mem 
bers  of  the  order  to  protect  him — peacea 
bly  at  first,  forcibly  if  necessary.  But  there 
was  to  be  nothing  beyond  acting  in  self- 
defense.  I  had  learned  of  persons  being 
attacked  on  account  of  their  political  prin 
ciples,  and  being  beaten  and  bruised;  and 
if  such  a  thing  occurred  again,  I  conceived 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


187 


it  to  be  the  duty  of  the  order  to  protect 
such  persons  as  were  assailed. 

The  civil  law  might  have  been  sufficient 
to  protect  them,  but  there  were  many  in 
stances  where  it  had  not  afforded  protec 
tion;  1  think  if  a  man  was  attacked,  he 
had  the  right  to  self-protection;  and  it  was 
upon  this  principle  that  the  order  was  to 
act.  When  I  attended  the  Grand  Council 
I  gave  no  password;  I  was  vouched  for  by 
some  person  at  the  door;  I  did  not  know 
that  it  was  a  rule  that  no  person  was  ad 
mitted  to  that  body  who  had  not  taken 
three  degrees. 

The  following  was  then  quoted  by  the 
Judge  Advocate:  "Whenever  the  officials, 
to  whom  the  people  have  intrusted  the 
powers  of  the  Government,  shall  refuse  to 
administer  it  in  strict  accordance  with  its 
Constitution,  and  shall  assume  and  exercise 
power  not  delegated,  it  is  the  inherent 
right  and  imperative  duty  of  the  people 
to  resist  such  officials,  and,  if  need  be,  ex 
pel  them  by  force  of  arms;  such  resistance 
is  not  revolution,  but  is  solely  the  assertion 
of  right." 

I  can  not  say  whether  I  have  heard  that 
before  or  not.  I  probably  did  at  Indianap 
olis.  There  was'  something  to  that  effect 
among  the  cardinal  principles  of  the  order, 
and  I  do  not  know  that  I  have  heard 
members  of  the  organization  dissent  from 
it.  I  have  expressed  the  same  opinion  in 
my  paper,  but  I  can  not  say  that  the  order 
generally  held  to  it  as  a  principle,  though 
it  is  my  opinion  it  did.  I  have  said  that 
the  President  had  exercised  power  that 
the  Constitution  had  not  given  him,  and 
used  authority  not  delegated  to  him. 

I  do  not  know  that  I  have  ever  expressed 
myself  to  the  effect  that  usurpation  might 
reach  a  point  where  revolution  would  be 
necessary. 

SAMUEL  McGAUGiiEY,  a  witness  for  the  ac 
cused,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly 
sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as 
follows : 

For  fourteen  years  I  have  resided  at 
Huntington,  Indiana;  am  a  farmer.  For 
two  years  I  served  as  Treasurer  of  the 
county.  I  became  acquainted  with  Mr. 
Milligan  soon  after  settling  in  Huntington. 
I  am  acquainted  with  his  moral  character; 
it  is  good;  also  with  his  reputation  as  a 
peaceable,  orderly,  and  law-abiding  citizen; 
it  is  also  good.  I  became  a  member  of  a 
secret  political  society,  in  Huntington,  about 
a  year  ago,  but  paid  very  little  attention  to 
the  matter.  I  understood  it  to  be  purely  a 
political  association,  and  I  remember  the 
idea  was  suggested  by  some  of  the  members 
that  it  was  to  counteract  the  influence  of 
the  Loyal  League. 

CUTTER  S.  DOBBINS,  a  witness  for  the  ac 
cused,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly 
sworn,  testified  as  follows  : 


I  reside  at  Dover  Hill,  Martin  county,  In 
diana,  and  practice  law.  I  have  been  ac 
quainted  with  Stephen  Horsey  for  nine  or 
ten  years.  I  am  acquainted  with  his  char 
acter  as  a  quiet,  peaceable,  law-abiding  citi 
zen,  and  it  is  good. 

Q.  You  may  state  whether  Stephen  Hor 
sey  is  a  man  of  influence  in  the  neighbor 
hood  where  he  lives. 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate,  and  withdrawn. 

HARRISON  CONNELL,  being  recalled  as  a 
witness  for  the  accused,  testified  as  follows: 

I  am  acquainted  with  the  character  of 
Stephen  Horsey  as  a  peaceable,  quiet,  law- 
abiding  citizen  ;  it  is  good. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

It  was  not  extensively  known  in  his 
neighborhood  that  Mr.  Horsey  got  the  pow 
der  and  shot,  about  which  I  testified;  and 
I  do  not  know  that  such  a  fact  would  con 
duce  to  his  reputation  as  a  peaceable,  law- 
abiding  citizen.  I  assisted  in  carrying  the 
powder  and  lead  from  where  it  was  con 
cealed,  but  no  one  else  knew  of  it,  that  I 
know.  I  do  not  know  of  his  buying  any 
more  ammunition,  or  lead,  or  shot;  nor  do 
I  know  of  any  attempts  made  by  him  to 
arm  the  order.  I  do  not  know  that  I  ever 
heard  any  one  say  that  -he  was  disloyal  to 
the  Government. 

WILLIAM  M.  RANNEY,  a  witness  for  the  ac 
cused,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly 
sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as 
follows: 

I  reside  near  Shoals,  Martin  county,  In 
diana;  am  a  farmer.  I  am  acquainted  with 
the  character  of  Stephen  Horsey  as  a  peace 
able,  quiet,  law-abiding  citizen,  and  it  is 
good.  I  have  known  Mr.  Horsey  since 
1833.  1  joined  a  secret  organization  that 
was  formed  in  April,  1863;  Mr.  Shirkliff,  I 
think,  initiated  me.  Mr.  Horsey  and  sev 
eral  others  were  there.  I  do  not  know 
whether  Wesley  Tranter,  or  Stephen  Teney, 
was  there ;  we  met  in  a  vacant  house.  The 
obligation  we  took,  as  I  understood  it,  was 
to  support  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,  and  the  State  of  Indiana.  There 
was  some  other  obligation,  but  I  do  not  re 
collect  what  it  was.  I  did  not  meet  with 
the  organization  after  that  night.  . 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

The  name  of  the  order  I  joined  was  the 
Circle  of  Honor.  At  the  time  of  Mr.  Hor- 
sey's  arrest,  some  people  talked  pretty  hard 
about  him,  as  they  have  done  since. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Those  who  talked  hard  about  Mr.  Horsey 
at  the  time  of  his  arrest,  were  political  op 
ponents,  who  thought  him  guilty  of  what 
he  was  charged  with.  Up  to  the  time  of 
his  arrest,  his  character  for  peace  and  qui 
etness  was  good. 


188 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


The  Commission  adjourned,  to  meet  onlsary  for  the  public  welfare  to  arrest  this 


Thursday,  December  1,  at  10  o'clock,  A.  M. 


COURT  ROOM,  INDIANAPOLIS,  INDIANA,         ) 
December  1,  1804,  10  o'clock,  A.  M.  j 

The  Commission  met  pursuant  to  adjourn 
ment. 

All  the  members  present.  Also,  the 
Judge  Advocate,  the  accused,  and  their 
counsel. 

The  proceedings  were  read  and  approved. 

General  ALVIN  P.  HOVEY,  a  witness  for  the 


man,  and  upon  that  you  moved? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  accused,  and 
withdrawn. 

The  witness : 

1  would  like  to  make  this  further  explan 
ation.  The  first  person  arrested  by  me,  was 
Dodd ,  that  arrest  was  made  without  con 
sulting  the  authorities  any-where.  Subse 
quently  I  made  the  others.  In  the  first  ar 
rest,  I  took  the  responsibility  on  myself;  I 
was  authorized  by  the  War  Department  to 
make  the  subsequent  arrests,  and  to  take 


accused,  was   then  introduced,  and,  being  I  what  action  I  might  deem  advisable  in  re- 
duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  gard  to  it,  and   I   did  so.     The  testimony 

which   I  have  given 

prisoners,  applies   to 


as  follows : 

Question  by  the  accused: 

State  your  name  and  official  position  ? 

Answer.  My  name  is  Alvin  P.  Hovey.  I 
am  Commander  of  the  District  of  Indiana. 

Q.  State  whether  or  not  it  was  by  your 
order  that  Mr.  Milligan  was  arrested  ? 

A.  It  was. 

Q.  State  upon  what  that  order  was 
based,  whether  upon  affidavit  made  to  you, 
or  upon  what  it  was  based? 

A.  It  was  based  upon  my  general  knowl 
edge  of  affairs  in  Indiana,  the  condition  of 
the  country,  and  Mr.  Milligan's  action  in 
regard  to  it,  together  with  the  dangers  that 
surrounded  us  at  that  time. 

Q.   What  actions  have  you  reference  to  ? 

A.  To  the  conspiracies  against  the  author 
ity  of  the  United  States. 

Q.  WThat  particular  actions  of  Mr.  Milligan 
in  the  matter  ? 

A.  Mr.  Milligan,  I  understood  from  reli 
able  authority,  was  a  Major  General  of  the 
organization,  and  had  taken  steps  to  aid  it, 
and  carry  on  revolution. 

Q.  Please  state  to  us  the  source  of  that 
information? 

A.  The  information  generally  came  from 
Detectives. 

Q.  State  who  they  were? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate,  and  withdrawn. 

Q.  Am  I  right  in  understanding  you  as 
Baying  that  the  order  was  not  based  upon 
an  affidavit? 

A.  It  was  not,  sir. 

Q.  State  Avhether  you  have  not  made  the 
observation   that  Mr.  Milligan  was  a  dan- 
"gerous  man;  if  so,  upon  what  information 
you  made  the  remark? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate,  and  withdrawn. 

Q.  Was  this  information  from  persons  re 
siding  in  Mr.  Milligan's  neighborhood,  or 
elsewhere? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate,  and  withdrawn. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

Question  by  the  Judge  Advocate: 

I  suppose,  General,  the  sum  of  the  matter 

was  this:  that  in  your  judgment  it  was  neces- 


with  regard  to  these 
each   and  all  of  the 


others. 

M.  B.  BRANT,  a  witness  for  the  accused, 
was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly  sworn 
by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  follows: 

I  live  in  Huritington  county,  Indiana. 
Since  the  fall  of  1844,  I  have  been  Auditor 
of  the  county.  I  became  acquainted  with 
Mr.  Milligan  in  1844,  and  since  1851  1  have 
known  him  intimately.  In  politics  1  am 
now  a  Republican  and  a  Union  man.  In 
years  past,  I  was  an  Old  Line  Whig.  The 
first  vote  I  ever  gave  was  for  Andrew  Jack 
son.  I  next  voted  for  Martin  Van  Buren, 
next  for  Harrison,  and  since  then  1  have 
been  connected  with  the  Democratic  party. 
I  am  acquainted  with  Mr.  Milligan's  moral 
character  in  the  community  in  which  he 
lives,  and  it  is  good.  1  am  acquainted  with 
his  general  reputation  as  a  law-abiding  citi 
zen;  that  reputation  is  good. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

Mr.  Milligan's  character  is  that  of  a  man 
who,  till  lately,  has  advised  entire  obedience 
to  the  law.  The  Democratic  party  still  re 
gard  him  as  a  law-abiding  citizen,  while 
Republicans  speak  of  him  as  operating,  of 
late,  against  the  laws  of  our  country.  Re 
publicans  regard  him  as  connected  with  a 
secret  organization  that  is  in  favor  of  further 
secession  among  the  States,  and  in  favor  of 
the  establishment  of  a  North-western  Con 
federacy. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

I  think  that  that  reputation  is  confined 
exclusively  to  the  more  rabid  and  bitter 
portion  of  the  Republican  party,  and  most 
of  this  reputation  has  grown  up  since  about 
the  time  of  Dodd's  arrest,  and  since  the  ex 
posure  of  the  members  of  the  Sons  of  Lib 
erty  in  the  public  prints;  though  a  year  ago 
last  fall  Mr.  Milligan  made  speeches,  and 
some  persons  in  the  Republican  party  re 
garded  him  as  a  man  opposed  to  the  Gov 
ernment,  and  as  seeking  the  establishment 
of  a  North-western  Confederacy.  By  oppo 
sition  to  the  Government,  I  mean  opposition 
to  Mr.  Lincoln's  Administration. 

W.  J.  SMITH,  a  witness  for  the  accused, 


TREASON    TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


189 


was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly  sworn 


by    the  Judge    Advocate,  testified    as 
lows: 


fol 


acquainted  with  him;  he  has  been  my  fam 
ily  physician. 


~,     ,    .     .,      TT    ...    ,   ,  ,-..  ,  .  ,       JOHN  NAVE,  a  witness  for  the  accused,  was 

I  am  Clerk  in  the  United  States  District  then  introdu'ced  and  bei       dulv  sworn  b 

2?™S£5?   ^u  fP?S1n°n  !TCe  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  follows: 

May,  1863      ihe  business  of  the  Court  has       Dr  Zu«mpo  hft8  be(Jn          famil      h     ician 

in  no  way  been   interfered  with      We  have  f     geven  Qr  ei  ht  \  fc     *  Jg 

had  our  special  and  regular  terms,  and  tation  fop  trut|  and  veracity  in  the  neigh- 
processes  have  been  issued  and  returned  borhood  where  he  u  al/d  it  is  d*  L 
regularly  There  have  been  one  or  two  WQuld  belieye  him  und'ep  Qath  T|e  - 
suite  instituted  for  obstructing  the  processes 
of  the  Court,  but  the  regular  business  of 
the  Court  has  not  been  interfered  with. 

SAMUEL  CHANDLER,  a  witness  for  the  ac 
cused,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly 
sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as 
follows : 

I  am  Deputy  Clerk  of  the  United  States 
Circuit  Court,  and  have  held  that  position 
since  the  4th  of  February,  1863.  The  Court 
has  been  exercising  jurisdiction  in  this 
State;  since  that  time  it  has  been  open, 
and  holding  its  regular  sessions,  and  there 
has  been  no  disturbance  or  civil  commotion 
to  interfere  with  the  business  of  the  Court, 
that  I  know  of. 

D.  GARLAND  ROSE,  a  witness  for  the  ac 
cused,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly 
sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as 
follows : 

I  am  United  States  Marshal  for  this  Dis 
trict,  and  have  held  that  office  since  April, 
1861.  I  do  not  know  of  any  obstructions 
to  the  serving  of  processes  during  the  past 
year ;  I  do  not  know  of  any  suits  now  pend 
ing  in  the  Federal  Courts  for  obstructing 
the  service  of  process,  though  the  District 
Attorney  could  answer  that  question  better 
than  I  could. 

I  know  threats  were  made,  and  resistance 
was  apprehended,  but  none  was  offered 
that  caused  any  arrests  to  be  made,  that  I 
know  of. 

EDWARD  HARRISON,  a  witness  for  the  Gov 
ernment,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being 
duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified 
as  follows : 

I  live  in  Wells  county,  Union  township, 
Indiana;  I  am  a  farmer,  and  at  present  sub 
stitute  in  the  army.  I  have  known  Dr. 
Zumro  for  five  years;  I  live  about  three- 
quarters  of  a  mile  from  him.  I  know  his 
general  reputation  in  the  neighborhood  in 
which  he  lives,  and  that  reputation  is  good, 
and  from  that  reputation  I  would  believe 
him  under  oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  am  a  Union  man.  Among  those  I  have 
heard  speak  of  Dr.  Zumro,  are  Mr.  Ratliff 
and  Mr.  Cagger,  both  of  whom  are  Union 
men  Ratlitf  said  that  he  respected  Zumro; 
that  he  was  a  man  of  principle,  and  could 


be  depended  upon.  No  inducements  have 
been  held  out  to  me  to  testify  as  to  Zurnro's 
character.  I  have  been  pretty  intimately 


of  men  that  have  usually  spoken  against 
Dr.  Zumro,  belong  to  the  Democratic  party. 
I  have  not  heard  any  body  else  say  any 
thing  against  him.  I,  myself,  belong  to  the 
Democratic  party. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  know  that  Dr.  Zumro  has  had  enemies 
in  the  medical  profession  ;  I  have  heard  men 
say  that  he  was  a  great  liar  ;  but  it  was  by  a 
Dr.  Joseph  Scott  and  others,  who  differ  from 
him  professionally,  and  it  did  not  affect  his 
character  for  truth  and  veracity.  Before 
this  controversy  came  up,  I  have  heard  Dr. 
Stockwell  and  Mr.  Daniel  Ilaeflee  speak  of 
him  as  a  man  of  truth  ;  they  always  spoke 
well  of  him. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Before  these  trials  came  up,  I  did  not 
hear  any  one  speak  against  Dr.  Zumro,  ex 
cept  for  some  special  reason,  or  because  he 
was  a  personal  enemy. 

W.  C.  SMOCK,  a  witness  for  the  accused, 
was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly  sworn 
by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  fol 
lows: 

I  am  Deputy  Clerk  of  the  Markle  Circuit 
Court,  and  ex-officio  of  the  Common  Pleas 
Court.  The  courts  of  this  county  have 
been  unobstructed  in  the  exercise  of  their 
jurisdiction. 

DAVID  STOCKMAN,  a  witness  for  the  Gov 
ernment,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being 
duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified 
as  follows  : 

I  live  in  Rock  Creek  township,  Wells 
county,  Indiana;  I  have  been  somewhat  in 
timately  acquainted  with  Pr.  Zumro  for 
about  three  years.  I  live  about  a  quarter 
of  a  mile  from  him.  I  know  his  reputa 
tion  for  truth  and  veracity  to  be  good,  and 
would  certainly  believe  him  under  oath. 
Politically  I  belong  to  the  Democratic 
party. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 


I  have  heard  people  speak  against  Dr. 
Zumro,  and  say  that  he  was  not  a  very 
good  Doctor.  I  have  not  mixed  much  with 
the  people  of  the  neighborhood,  but  as  far 
as  I  have  heard,  no  one  has  spoken  against 
him  as  a  man  of  truth. 

JACOB  FARLING,  a  witness  for  the  Govern 
ment,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly 
sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as 
follows: 


190 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


I  live  in  Rock  Creek  township,  Wells  coun 
ty,  Indiana.  I  am  trustee  of  that  town 
ship;  I  belong  to  the  Democratic  party, 
and  joined  the  Sons  of  Liberty.  I  live 
about  five  miles  from  Dr.  Zumro;  have 
known  him  four  or  five  years;  he  has  been 
my  Doctor;  his  reputation  for  truth  and 
veracity  in  our  neighborhood,  where  he 
doctors  most  of  the  people,  is  good  as  far 
as  I  have  learned;  the  people  of  that 
neighborhood  are  mostly  Pennsylvania 
Dutch.  I  did  not  hear  any  thing  against 
his  reputation  before  these  treason  cases 
came  up ;  and  I  would  believe  him  under 
oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  have  not  heard  Dr.  Zumro' s  character 
much  discussed;  it  did  not  come  up;  I 
have  not  heard  people  speak  against  him 
until  of  late;  since  these  cases  came  up,  I 
have  heard  people  speak  ill  of  him. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

I  never  heard  any  thing  said  against  Dr. 
Zumro,  till  he  came  on  the  stand  and  testi 
fied  about  these  Sons  of  Liberty. 

WILLIAM  R  TAYLOR,  a  witness  for  the  Gov 
ernment,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being 
duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified 
as  follows: 

I  live  in  Rock  Creek  township,  Wells 
county,  in  this  State,  and  run  a  saw  mill. 
I  have  acted  as  Justice  of  the  Peace 
for  two  terms.  Politically  I  am  a  Republi 
can,  and  voted  for  the  Union  party.  I 
have  been  drafted,  and  am  now  a  soldier. 
Have  known  Dr.  Zumro  ten  years,  dur 
ing  which  time  he  has  been  my  family  phy 
sician.  1  am  acquainted  with  his  general 
reputation  for  truth  and  veracity ;  that  rep 
utation  is  good,  and  I  would  believe  him 
under  oath. 

R.  C.  BOOKING,  a  witness  for  the  accused, 
was  then  introduced,  and,  being  duly  sworn 
by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified  as  fol 
lows: 

I  am  the  inventor  of  certain  Greek  fire 
shells,  and  missiles  of  various  kinds.  I 
made  a  shell  and  applied  for  a  patent, 
and  had  a  caveat  filed  for  it  as  well  as 
for  the  Greek  fire,  which  I  invented,  and 
which  I  claim  to  be  the  same  as  that  used 
by  the  Greeks,  and  which  burns  under 
water.  I  have  been  traveling  for  the  pur 
pose  of  presenting  my  claims  to  the  public, 
since  the  spring  of  18G3.  Have  been  at 
Cincinnati,  Louisville,  Detroit  and  here. 
Being  short  of  means,  I  was  trying  to  find 
some  person  to  assist  me  in  getting  my  in 
vention  through.  It  was  open  to  the  pub 
lic  ;  and  I  came  here  to  try  it  by  order  of 
General  Burnside.  I  brought  it  before 
Adjutant  General  Noble,  Colonel  Freybar- 
ger,  Major  McClure,  General  Wilcox  and 
his  staff,  Mr.  Holloway,  editor  of  the  Indi 
anapolis  Journal,  and  I  showed  it  every 


where  to  the  public.  General  Wilcox  was 
Commander  of  this  State  at  that  time.  I 
am  not  a  member  of  the  secret  organization 
known  as  the  Order  of  American  Knights 
or  Sons  of  Liberty,  and  never  was.  My 
Greek  fire  had  no  connection  with  the  or 
der,  nor  did  1  receive  any  assistance  from  it 
in  any  way.  I  know  Dr.  Bowles.  He  asked 
me,  when  in  Louisville,  if  I  would  show 
him  and  his  friends  some  of  the  shells  and 
the  Greek  fire;  I  told  him  yes.  In  the  af 
ternoon  he  came  to  my  room  at  the  Louis 
ville  Hotel,  with  several  gentlemen,  and 
I  showed  it  and  explained  it  to  them.  I 
told  them  it  was  a  pity  I  could  not  get 
along  with  my  inventions  for  want  of 
means,  and  Dr.  Bowles  said  he  would 
see  some  of  his  friends  and  ascertain  if 
something  could  not  be  done,  so  that  I 
could  get  along  with  the  shell.  In  the 
evening,  when  I  was  at  the  hotel,  a  young 
man  came  to  me,  and  asked  me  to  go  up  to 
Dr.  Kalfus'  office;  when  I  went  up, 'some 
person,  I  did  not  know  who,  said  to  me, 
that  some  of  the  gentlemen  to  whom  I  had 
shown  my  inventions  had  agreed  to  help 
me,  and  they  gave  me  a  little  paper  with 
money  in  it,  which  I  did  not  count  until  I 
got  back  to  the  hotel,  when  I  found  that  it 
was  in  the  neighborhood  of  two  hundred 
dollars. 

This  gift  had  no  connection  that  I  know 
of  with  the  Order  of  American  Knights, 
or  Sons  of  Liberty,  and  not  a  word  was 
said  about  any  thing  of  the  kind.  Nothing 
was  said  that  I  know  of,  at  the  hotel,  about 
using  my  invention  for  improper,  disloyal 
or  treasonable  purposes;  when  the  gentle 
men  talked  together,  they  were  quite  far 
off  from  me,  and  they  spoke  very  low.  I 
was  never  in  Salem,  Indiana;  though  I 
may  have  passed  through  the  place  on  the 
train ;  nor  did  I  ever  exhibit  my  shells,  or 
experiment  with  my  Greek  fire  to  Mr. 
Horace  Heffren,  at  Salem.  I  never  saw 
him  until  I  met  him  in  the  cell  where  I  am 
now  confined.  I  never  received  from  Dr. 
Bowles  any  money,  or  aid  in  any  way;  nor 
did  I  have  any  contract  with  him  to  fur 
nish  my  missiles  to  him  or  to  the  Order  of 
Sons  of  Liberty. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

Dr.  Bowles  was  present  when  the  money 
was  given  to  me,  but  I  do  not  know  who  it 
was  that  furnished  it,  and  never  heard  any 
one  say.  I  think  it  was  some  gentleman, 
to  whom  I  showed  the  shell.  I  did  not 
know  the  name  of  any  one  present,  except 
Dr.  Bowles  and  Mr.  Stidger.  My  object  in 
going  to  the  Louisville  Hotel  was  to  try  to 
get  help.  I  knew  Dr.  Bowles  before  going 
there,  having  seen  him  at  his  place;  he 
keeps  a  watering  place;  I  went  there  to 
board  at  one  time  when  I  was  sick.  When  I 
went  to  Dr.  Bowies'  place,  he  was  not  there; 
I  waited  perhaps  an  hour;  when  he  came 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


191 


back,  he  asked  me  what  my  business  was,  |  I  reside  at  Markle,  Huntington  county, 
and  I  told  him  that  I  had  an  invention,  j  Indiana.  I  am  Captain  of  a  home  guard 
In  the  conversation  it  came  out  that  I  was  company  ;  I  belong  to  the  Union  party.  I 


out  of  means,  and  I  thought  I  would  board 
there,  as  it  was  cheaper  than  here.  He 
said  if  I  would  go  to  Louisville,  he  would 
meet  me  there  with  some  friends,  and  try 
to  help  me.  I  staid  at  his  house  until  after 
dinner,  when  I  left. 

Q.  Do  you  pretend  to  say  that  you  told 
them  you  were  hard  up,  and  they  gave 
you  two  hundred  dollars  without  mak 
ing  any  agreement,  or  exacting  any  prom 
ise? 

A.   Yes,  sir;  they  just  presented  me  with 


two  hundred  dollars. 
From    Louisville   I 


think   I   came  here, 


and  staid  about  a  week;  I  then  went  to 
Detroit,  and  staid  about  another  week; 
from  Detroit  I  went  to  Cincinnati;  from 
there  to  Adams  county,  Ohio;  then  back  to 
Cincinnati,  and  from  Cincinnati  here,  where 
I  have  staid  until  now. 

Q.  When  was  it  you  were  in  Windsor, 
Canada? 

A.  I  think  it  was  in  April  or  May.  I  was 
there  a  couple  of  weeks,  but  doing  nothing, 
I  boarded  with  a  Mr.  Steele ;  I  think  they 
called  him  Colonel  Steele,  but  I  do  not 
know  why.  Possibly  he  was  a  Colonel  in 
the  rebel  army,  though  he  never  told  me, 
and  I  never  asked  him.  There  were  a 
couple  of  young  men  boarding  with  Colonel 
Steele;  one  was  a  nephew  of  his,  the  other 
I  did  not  know.  One  of  them,  I  believe, 
had  been  in  the  rebel  army.  I  think  I  went 
from  Kentucky  to  Canada.  1  knew  Colonel 
Sfceele  in  Kentucky,  when  I  was  Major  in 
Metcalf's  Cavalry.  It  was  when  I  was  in 
Detroit  that  I  went  over  to  the  Canada  side, 
and  saw  Colonel  Steele  in  a  billiard  saloon. 
I  told  him  how  I  was  situated ;  that  I 
wanted  a  partner  to  go  in  with  rne  to  get 
that  shell  through;  Mayor  Barker,  in  De 
troit,  became  my  partner.  I  slept  at  Col 
onel  Steele's,  and  went  over  to  Detroit  every 
day.  1  saw  Mr.  Vallandigham  there  two  or 
three  times,  but  never  spoke  to  him. 

WILLIAM  H.  CHAPMAN,  a  witness  for  the 
Government,  was  then  introduced,  and,  be 
ing  duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  tes 
tified  as  follows: 

I  reside  at  Markle,  Huntington  county, 
Indiana,  where  I  have  lived  about  eight 
years.  I  am  acquainted  with  Dr.  Zumro, 
and  know  his  general  reputation  for  truth 
and  veracity,  and,  from  that  reputation,  I 
certainly  should  believe  him  under  oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  am  a  Union  man,  and  have  voted  with 
that  party  for  several  years. 

WILLIAM  JOHNSON,  a  witness  for  the  Gov 
ernment,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being 
duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified 
as  follows: 


have  been  acquainted  with  Dr.  Zumro  eight 
or  ten  years,  and  know  his  reputation  for 
truth  and  veracity;  that  reputation  is  good, 
and  I  would  believe  him  under  oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  have  heard  some  people  speak  against 
Dr.  Zumro,  but  I  believe  they  have  been  his 
personal  enemies;  and  I  do  not  know  that 
Dr.  Zumro  has  a  larger  share  of  men  who 
speak  ill  of  him,  than  other  people  who  live 
in  a  town  like  Markle.  There  are  between 
two  and  three  hundred  people  in  Markle. 

SAMUEL  D.  PRICE,  a  witness  for  the  Gov 
ernment,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being 
duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified 
as  follows: 

I  reside  in  Rockcreek  township,  Wells 
county,  Indiana.  I  am  a  carpenter;  at 
present  a  soldier  in  the  army,  which  I  en 
tered  about  three  weeks  ago.  I  have  known 
Dr.  Zumro,  intimately,  for  three  or  four 
years ;  he  is  our  family  physician.  I  know 
his  general  reputation  for  truth  and  vera 
city;  it  is  good:  and  I  would  believe  him 
under  oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

Dr.  Zumro  never  made  any  promises,  or 
told  me  that  I  should  be  assigned  to  easy 
duties,  if  I  testified  in  this  case.  I  am  not 
much  acquainted  about  Markle,  nor  in 
Huntington  county.  I  never  heard  any 
one  say  any  thing  against  Dr.  Zumro,  but  I 
have  heard  several  speak  in  favor  of  him 
before  these  treason  cases  came  up.  Among 
them  I  have  heard  Mr.  Dresser,  Mr.  Kitting 
and  Mr.  Taylor.  In  politics  I  am  a  Repub- 
lican. 

TIIURSTON  W.  KITTING,  a  witness  for  the 
Government,  was  then  introduced,  and, 
being  duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate, 
testified  as  follows: 

1  reside  in  Rockcreek  township,  Wells 
county,  Indiana,  and  am  a  farmer.  I  live 
four  or  five  miles  from  Markle.  I  have 
been  somewhat  acquainted  with  Dr.  Zumro 
about  four  years.  His  reputation  is  gener 
ally  good,  and  I  would  believe  him  under 
oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  am  a  Union  man.  I  have  heard  several 
people  speak  of  Dr.  Zumro,  and  they  have 
said  that  he  was  a  fine  man,  and  that  he 
was  thought  a  good  deal  of. 

BORZILLAI  MESSLER,  a  witness  for  the  Gov 
ernment,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being 
duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified 
as  follows: 

I  reside  in  Rockcreek  township,  Wells 
county,  and  live  about  two  miles  from  Dr. 
Zumro,  whom  I  have  known  eight  or  ten 


192 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


years ;  his  reputation  for  truth  and  veracity 
is  good,  and  I  should  believe  him  under 
oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  used  to  vote  the  Democratic  ticket,  but 
I  voted  for  Fremont  for  President,  and  have 
voted  the  Republican  ticket  since. 

THOMAS  G.  SMITH,  a  witness  for  the  Gov 
ernment,  was  then  introduced,  and,  being 
duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  testified 
as  follows: 

I  reside  in  Markle,  Huntington  county, 
Indiana;  have  lived  there  since  1860;  I 
have  known  Dr.  Zumro  since  that  time.  My 
private  relations  with  him  have  not  been 
good.  His  reputation  for  truth  and  veracity 
in  the  neighborhood  where  he  lives  is  gene 
rally  good,  and  I  would  believe  him  under 
oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I  have  said,  in  times  past,  that  Dr.  Zumro 
was  a  scoundrel;  that  was  before  this  con 
troversy  came  up,  and  it  arose  out  of  a  per 
sonal  difficulty,  which  made  me  feel  un 
kindly  toward  him  at  the  time.  I  have  heard 
Dr.  Zumro  spoken  against,  but  I  thought 
medical  matters  caused  it.  I  have  heard 
Dr.  Zumro  censured  by  some  in  connection 
with  the  church  which  he  left;  I  believe 
the  circumstances  were  these :  In  Pennsyl 
vania  there  is  a  denomination  which  has  a 
large  fund  for  the  education  of  ministers ; 
Dr.  Zumro  was  one  of  their  students,  and 
was  educated  for  the  ministry  at  their  ex 
pense.  He  afterward  changed  his  course, 
and  instead  of  preaching,  practiced  medi 
cine.  Politically  I  am  a  friend  of  the  Ad 
ministration;  I  did  not,  however,  vote  for 
Mr.  Lincoln  the  first  time  he  was  elected; 
in  1859  I  voted  with  the  Democratic  party. 

Mrs.  ELIZABETH  T.  SIMONS,  a  witness  for 
the  Government,  was  then  introduced,  and, 
being  duly  sworn  by  the  Judge  Advocate, 
testified  as  follows : 

I  reside  at  Lagro,  Indiana;  formerly  I  re 
sided  at  Huntington,  Indiana.  My  father's 
name  is  Rev.  Richard  A.  Curran. 

Q.  Did  you  have  any  difficulty  with  your 
father  about  the  time  of  your  marriage  ? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  accused,  as 
it  is  incompetent  to  impeach  a  witness  who 
is  called  as  an  impeaching  witness.  Mr. 
Curran  having  been  called  to  testify  to  Mr. 
Milligan's  good  character,  and  to  Dr.  Zum 
ro' s  bad  character. 

If  it  were  permitted  to  call  witnesses  to 
impeach  witnesses  for  character,  they  might 
call  rebutting  witnesses,  and  there  would  be 
no  end  to  such  testimony.  A  witness  whose 
character  is  impeached,  can  not  call  rebut- 
xmg  witnesses  to  testify  to  his  good  charac 
ter,  but  that  ends  it.  You  might  inquire 
whether  an  impeaching  witness  has  a  good 
character,  or  whether  he  has  not.  It  is  also 
u  rule  of  law,  that,  on  all  material  matters,  a 


witness  can  not  be  impeached  by  calling 
other  witnesses  as  to  a  matter  of  fact. 

The  Judge  Advocate  replied: 

The  reverend  gentleman  who  testified  in 
this  Court,  was  called  for  the  purpose  of  cer 
tifying  to  the  moral  character  of  Mr.  Milli- 
gan,  as  well  as  to  his  loyalty  and  law-abid 
ing  disposition.  He  testified  at  length  upon 
that  question.  To  ascertain  from  what 
stand-point  he  testified  as  to  Mr.  Milligan's 
character,  in  those  respects,  I  asked  about 
his  own  sentiments,  also  as  to  whether  he 
had  a  difficulty  with  his  daughter  on  this 
question,  and  whether  he  had  not  laid  vio 
lent  hands  upon  her. 

I  asked  these  questions  to  ascertain  his 
sentiments  toward  the  Government.  When 
asked  whether  he  had  any  difficulty  with 
his  daughter  about  her  marriage  with  a 
Union  man,  and  whether  he  had  laid  vio 
lent  hands  upon  her,  he  flatly  denied  the 
charges.  It  is,  therefore,  perfectly  legiti 
mate  to  disprove  his  assertions.  1  propose 
to  ask  the  character  of  the  man  by  whom 
the  accused  undertook  to  establish  his  char 
acter. 

The  accused  replied: 

I  do  not  remember  that  the  foundation 
for  the  impeachment  was  laid  by  calling  the 
attention  of  the  witness  to  the  time  and 
place  when  he  made  the  declarations,  or 
committed  the  act  upon  which  he  is  to  be 
impeached.  Unless  this  was  done,  the  wit 
ness  can  not  be  impeached.  I  quote  from 
Greenleaf  On  Evidence,  vol.  1,  page  602: 

"The  credit  of  a  witness  may  also  be  im 
peached  by  proof  that  he  has  made  state 
ments  out  of  Court  contrary  to  what  he  has  testified 
at  the  trial.  But  it  is  only  in  such  matters 
as  are  relevant  to  the  issue,  that  the  wit 
ness  can  be  contradicted." 

I  may  here  ask  whether  it  was  relevant 
to  the  issue  to  know  whether  the  witness 
choked  his  daughter  or  not,  or  did  not 
want  her  to  marry  a  Union  man  ? 

The  author  adds : 

"And  before  this  can  be  done,  it  is  gene 
rally  held  necessary,  in  the  case  of  verbal 
statements,  first  to  ask  him  as  to  the  time, 
place,  and  person  involved  in  the  supposed 
contradiction.  It  is  not  enough  to  ask  him 
the  general  question,  whether  he  has  ever 
said  so  and  so,  nor  whether  he  has  always 
told  the  same  story;  because  it  may  fre 
quently  happen,  that  upon  the  general 
question,  he  may  not  remember  whether  he 
has  so  said;  whereas,  when  his  attention  is 
directed  to  particular  circumstances  and 
occasions,  he  may  recollect  and  explain 
what  he  has  formerly  said.  This  course  of 
proceeding  is  considered  indispensable, 
from  a  sense  of  justice  to  the  witness;  for 
as  the  direct  tendency  of  the  evidence  is  to 
'  impeach  his  veracity,  common  justice  re 
quires  that,  by  first  calling  his  attention  to 
the  subject,  he  should  have  an  opportunity 
to  recollect  the  facts,  and,  if  necessary,  to 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


193 


correct  the  statement  already  given ;  as  well 
as  by  a  re-examination  to  explain  the  na 
ture,  circumstances,  meaning,  and  design 
of  what  he  is  proved  elsewhere  to  have 
said." 

The  present  case  is  one  where  an  attempt 
is  not  only  made  to  contradict  the  witness 
in  regard  to  verbal  statements,  but  also  as 
to  facts  not  relevant  to  the  issue,  and  the 
rule  of  law  just  quoted  is  against  the  com 
petency  of  the  mode  of  examination  pro 
posed  by  the  Judge  Advocate. 

The  Judge  Advocate  replied  : 

If  the  testimony  of  the  witness  was  not 
relevant  to  the  issue,  he  should  not  have 
been  put  on  the  stand.  It  is  relevant  to 
the  issue  to  find  out  whether  he  told  the 
truth  or  not. 

The  court  room  was  then  cleared  for  de 
liberation. 

On  being  reopened,  the  Judge  Advocate 
announced  that  the  objection  had  been 
overruled,  and  the  question  sustained. 

The  witness  continued:  I  had  a  difficulty 
with  my  father  at  the  time  of  my  marriage, 
but  he  always  said  that  he  did  not  oppose 
my  marriage  on  account  of  the  politics  of 
my  husband,  though  my  impression  has 
been  otherwise.  I  think  his  words  were, 
that  he  would  as  soon  I  would  marry  a 
negro  as  an  abolitionist.  He  did  use  vio 
lence  toward  me  during  that  difficulty; 
he  laid  hands  on  me,  and  caught  me 
by  the  throat,  and  made  threats  against  my 
life. 

Q.  Did  he  choke  you? 

Question  objected  to,  and  withdrawn. 

He  ordered  me  to  leave  the  house,  and 
forbade  me  to  return.  He  threatened  to 
knock  my  brains  out  if  he  met  me  any 
where  with  Mr.  Simons. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION    BY   JOHN  R.  COFFROTH,  ESQ. 

My  father  drove  me  from  his  house  in  the 
morning,  and,  by  the  advice  of  my  mother, 
I  went  to  Dr.  Blount's.  In  the  afternoon 
of  the  same  day,  he  carne  writh  Mr.  Coffroth 
to  the  house  where  I  was  staying.  I  re 
member  my  father  saying  to  me,  in  an  un 
der  tone,  that  he  was  perfectly  willing  that 
I  should  return  home.  I  had  had  a  con 
versation  with  Mr.  Coffroth  prior  to  that. 
When  I  got  to  Dr.  Blount's,  I  wrote  a  letter 
to  Mr.  Simons,  stating  the  difficulty  that 
had  occurred.  From  there  I  went  to  his 
brother's.  It  was  through  Mrs.  Blount's  in 
fluence  I  sent  for  Mr.  Coffroth. 

Q.  What  motive  did  you  haVe  in  sending 
for  me? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advo 
cate. 

The  counsel  replied : 

I  press  the  question,  because  the  witness 
was  laboring  under  strong  mental  excite 
ment,  and  to  show  that  her  father  went 
there  with  myself,  and  that  the  whole  mat 
ter  was  talked  over  and  reconciled,  and 
13 


;  harmony  restored  between  them.  I  pro- 
j  pose,  further,  to  show  that  she  was  laboring 
:  under  hallucination,  and  misunderstood  her 
|  father.  There  are  many  reasons  why  this 
I  question  should  be  allowed.  It  is  an  act  of 
Dimple  justice  to  the  accused,  and  to  the 
witness,  whose  character  is  called  in  ques 
tion,  that  this  course  of  examination  should 
be  permitted. 

The  Judge  Advocate  replied : 

The  present  question  is  :  "What  was  your 
motive  in  sending  for  me  ?"  It  is  perfectly 
immaterial  to  the  Court  what  the  motives 
of  the  witness  were;  that  the  counsel  can 
i  investigate  privately,  if  he  desires.  The 
simple  question  before  the  Court  is,  did 
Mr.  Curran  tell  the  truth  when  he  said  that 
he  had  never  laid  violent  hands  on  his 
daughter,  and  never  drove  her  from  his 
house?  The  examination-in-chief  was  con 
fined  to  that,  and  the  cross-examination 
must  be  confined  to  the  same  point.  If 
the  accused  can  ask  the  witness  what  oc 
curred  after  her  father  drove  her  from  his 
house,  he  can  ask  her  about  every  transac 
tion  in  her  life  from  that  time  to  this. 

The  Court  was  cleared  for  deliberation. 
On  the  Court  being  reopened,  the  Judge 
Advocate  announced  that  the  objection 
had  been  sustained. 

Question  by  the  accused: 

You  may  state  whether  on  the  day  of 
the  difficulty,  your  father  did  not  visit  you, 
and  \\7h ether  you  did  not  become  entirely 
reconciled  with  each  other? 

Objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  as 
involving  the  same  legal  question  just 
passed  on.  Question  withdrawn. 

Question  by  the  accused : 

When  your  father  came  to  see  you,  at 
that  time,  you  may  state,  if  in  the  conver 
sation  between  yourself  and  your  father, 
in  talking  over  the  difficulty,  was  it  not  ad 
mitted  by  you  to  him,  that  the  difficulty 
grew  out  of  your  calling  your  father  a  liar, 
and  putting  his  hand  on  your  shoulder  he 
stated  to  you  that  you  must  not  speak  to 
him  in  that  manner  ? 

A.  I  did  not  state  any  such  thing. 

Q.  Were  not  Mrs.  Young,  Mrs.  Dr.  Blount, 
and  Mrs.  Wm.  Blount  present  at  that  in 
terview  ? 

A.  Mrs.  Dr.  Blount  was  present;  I  am 
not  positive  about  Mrs.  Young  being 
there.  They  were  in  the  room  when  you 
came  in,  but  I  think  left,  except  Mrs.  Dr. 
Blount. 

Q.  Was  not  Mrs.  Dr.  Blount  present? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Is  it  not  true,  that  this  matter  of 
choking  you  was  nothing  more  than  the 
fact  that  your  father  laid  his  hand  on  your 
shoulder? 

A.  He  did  choke  me. 

Q.  Where  did  he  choke  you? 

A.  He  caught  me  by  the  throat 

Q.  Have  you  not,  for  the  last  four  or  five 


194 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


years,  been  laboring  under  strong  mental 
excitement,  induced  by  sun-stroke  ? 

Question  objected  to  by  the  Judge  Ad 
vocate. 

Such  a  question  can  only  be  put  for  one 
purpose:  To  prove  the  incompetency  of 
the  witness  to  testify.  It  is  too  late  to 
make  that  point.  It  should  have  been 
made  before  going  into  such  a  cross-exam 
ination  as  has  been  had. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  replied: 

The  objection  of  the  Judge  Advocate  is 
not  well  taken  as  to  the  proper  time  of 
showing  the  mental  condition  of  the  wit 
ness.  I  may  show  that  the  witness  is  en 
tirely  incompetent  to  testify  as  to  that  par 
ticular  occurrence,  because  she  was  labor 
ing  under  such  strong  mental  excitement 
that  it  rendered  her  statements  entirely 
incredible.  We  may  show  that  the  wit 
ness  was  laboring  under  a  partial  hallucin 
ation.  It  may  be  shown  that  during  this 
excitement,  and  partial  derangement,  the 
witness  may  have  conceived  ideas  not 
founded  on  fact,  and  I  do  not  confine  my 
question  to  the  particular  time  of  this  dif 
ficulty.  It  is  well  known  that  the  witness 
had  a  sun-stroke  several  years  ago,  which 
affected  her  brain,  and  caused  periods  of 
strong  mental  excitement,  and  that  they 
existed  before  the  time  of  this  difficulty, 
at  the  time,  and  since  then. 

I  withdraw  the  question  as  to  that  par 
ticular  time. 

My  father  has  accused  me  of  insanity, 
but  I  never  understood  that  his  reason  for 
RO  thinking,  was  the  cause  of  his  objection 
to  my  marriage. 

Q.  You  may  state  whether,  from  that  time 
to  this,  your  father  has  not  been  the  same 
kind  father  you  have  always  known  him 
to  be? 

Objected  to  by  the  Judge  Advocate,  as 
immaterial. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  replied : 

I  propose  to  show  that  for  a  long  series  of 
years,  and  indeed  up  to  this  time,  her  father 
has  been  one  of  the  kindest  and  most  in 
dulgent  of  parents.  I  think  I  can  show 
that  he  did  not  do  what  she  complained  of, 
and  that  she  may  be  mistaken  in  her  im 
pressions  about  this  matter. 


The  Judge  Advocate  withdrew  the  objec 
tion. 

The  witness  continued: 

I  can  not  say  that  my  father  was  kind  in 
his  treatment  of  me.  He  is  naturally  a 
very  passionate  man. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

When  I  was  suffering  from  this  mental 
excitement,  I  was  always  prepared  for  these 
attacks  of  delirium,  by  a  severe  pain  in 
my  head  several  hours  before  the  delirium 
set  in.  Sometimes  the  attacks  would  last 
a  day  and  a  night.  At  the  time  of  my 
father's  making  that  attack  upon  me,  I  had 
not  suffered  from  any  paroxysm  of  deli 
rium  for  more  than  a  year,  nor  have  I 
had  any  attack  since  that  difficulty  occur 
red,  except  immediately  afterward.  Within 
three  or  four  days  after  this  difficulty  I 
was  taken  quite  ill,  and  was  delirious  for 
twenty-four  hours  afterward,  during  which 
I  ruptured  a  blood  vessel.  Though  my 
father  is  a  passionate  and  excitable  man, 
he  did  not  use  any  violence  toward  me  be 
fore  the  difficulty  of  which  I  have  spoken. 
He  used  threatening  language  to  me 
in  the  fall,  I  think,  previous  to  this  diffi 
culty,  which  was  in  the  spring  of  1863. 
His 'threat,  1  think,  was  that  he  would 
shoot  me,  and  he  made  this  threat  several 
times.  I  never  had  any  words  with  my 
father  about  political  matters  until  the 
morning  of  my  difficulty,  and  I  do  not 
recall  any  other  instances  of  unkindness 
except  the  threats  in  connection  with 
my  contemplated  marriage  with  Mr.  Sim 
ons. 

I  never  heard  my  father  make  use  of  any 
expressions  against  the1  Government. 

The  Judge  Advocate  then  announced  that 
the  accused  and  the  Government  having  no 
more  witnesses  to  introduce,  the  testimony 
was  closed. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  desired  the 
Commission  to  adjourn  till  Tuesday  next, 
to  allow  time  for  the  preparation  of  their 
final  argument. 

The  Commission  then  adjourned,  to  meet 
on  Tuesday,  December  6,  1864,  at  10  o'clock, 
A.  M. 


A.RGTJME3STT 

ON    THK 

JURISDICTION  OF  A  MILITARY  COMMISSION, 


BY 


JONATHAN  W.  GORDON. 


J/r.  President  and  Gentlemen  of  the  Commission  : 

I  appear  for  Colonel  Bowles  and  Mr.  Hum 
phreys,  who  have  directed  me  to  discuss  the 
question  of  your  jurisdiction  to  try  them. 
Before  proceeding  to  this  discussion,  however, 
I  may  be  pardoned  for  briefly  referring  to 
some  preliminary  considerations. 

I  will  not  deny  that  I  am  oppressed  with 
the  greatness  and  weight  of  the  labor  assigned 
me.  Many  circumstances  conspire  to  make 
this  day's  work  a  burden,  while  but  few 
sources  of  external  encouragement  and  sup 
port  are  to  be  found. 

I  meet  at  the  threshold  of  the  solemn  duty 
of  this  hour,  the  settled  hostility  of  the  Ad 
ministration,  the  fierce  and  relentless  spirit 
of  the  dominant  party,  and  a  strong  tide  of 
prejudice  and  passion  created  by  a  partisan 
press,  which,  during  this  trial,  has  continually 
prejudged  the  questions  to  be  discussed  and 
decided  here  to-day.  Nor,  indeed,  has  this 
uncharitable  work  been  confined  to  the  press. 
Public  speakers  have  caught  up  the  testi 
mony  of  witnesses  even  before  their  cross-ex 
amination;  and,  with  such  one-sided,  partial, 
broken  fragments  of  the  whole  truth,  have 
rushed  eagerly  into  the  popular  arena,  and 
proclaimed  the  guilt  of  the  accused  in  every 
part  of  the 'State. 

It  is  impossible  that  these  facts  should  not 
have  met  your  observation  ;  and  almost  as  im 
possible  that  you  should  not  (although  you 
are  all  unconscious  of  their  influence)  be 
more  or  less  aiFected  by  them.  They  can  not, 
indeed,  have  passed  unobserved  by  you  who 
have  been  at  liberty,  and  circulating  freely 
among  the  people;  for  they  have  found  their 
way  even  into  the  lonely  cells  of  the  prisoners, 
and  made  themselves  manifest  by  the  dim  and 
dismal  twilight  of  their  dungeons.  They  are, 
indeed,  every-where.  They  have  polluted  the 
atmosphere,  and  infected  the  minds  of  the 
people.  They  are  like  the  air  around  and 
within  us;  and  pass  unheeded  and  unthought 
of,  while  they  give  color,  direction  and  tone  to 
all  our  thoughts  and  actions. 

Nor,  in  regard  to  one  of  the  accused,  has  it 
been  sufficient  for  the  purposes  of  those  who 
have  joined   in  this  hue   and   cry,   to  confine  I 
their  assaults  upon  him  to  the  present  time,  • 
or  to  the  offenses  with  which  he  now  stands  { 
charged.     They  have  gone  back  to  the  days  of  ' 


other  years,  and  have  dragged  up  and  scai- 
tered  over  the  land,  old,  and  stale,  and 
groundless  imputations  of  delinquency  orig 
inating  in  the  time  of  the  Mexicaa  War.  A 
record,  made  by  interested  men,  for  selfish  and 
ambitious  purposes,  has  been  referred  to,  and 
old  passions  and  prejudices  invoked,  upon  a 
point  whereon  the  people  of  Indiana  are  justly 
more  sensitive  than  upon  any  other — the  point 
of  honor.  But  even  that  record  does  not  as 
sail  his  courage,  his  gallantry,  or  his  patriot 
ism;  and,  if  it  did,  he  might  still  proudly  ap 
peal  from  it  to  the  testimony  of  his  illustrious 
commander,  Major  General  Zachary  Taylor, 
under  whose  eye  he  fought  on  the  glorious 
field  of  Buena  Vista.  To  the  report  of  that 
chieftain  he  appeals  against  the  slanders  born 
of  subsequent  and  interested  accounts  of  that 
contest;  and  prays  that  they  may  not  be  al 
lowed  to  give  a  false  and  injurious  coloring  to 
the  present  accusation,  and  to  the  sentence 
which  you  are  now  about  to  pronounce. 

I  confess,  however,  that  a  still  graver  source 
of  embarrassment  to  me,  in  the  performance 
of  my  present  duty,  springs  from  the  nature 
of  the  subject  to  be  discussed — the  importance 
of  the  principles  to  be  defended.  In  view  of 
these,  the  lives  and  fortunes  of  the  accused — 
and,  indeed,  of  us  all — are  as  nothing.  They 
and  we  are  but  mortal  men.  The  worst  that 
can  possibly  befall  them  at  your  hands,  can, 
therefore,  but  anticipate,  by  a  very  few  years, 
the  common  doom  which  time,  or  disease,  or 
both  together,  will  bring  to  them  and  to  us  all; 
for 

"  To  every  man  upon  this  earth,  death  cometh  soon  or 
late." 

It  is  not,  then,  merely  because  the  lives  and 
fortunes  of  the  accused  are  suspended  upon 
the  result  of  this  trial,  that  I  confess  myself 
embarrassed — overwhelmed  at  this  moment, 
in  the  presence  of  the  duty  to  which  it  calls 
me.  That  the  lives,  and  fortunes,  and  good 
fame  of  the  defendants  are  all  involved  in  this 
cause,  is,  indeed,  of  itself,  a  fact  of  sufficient 
importance  to  touch  very  nearly  any  one 
whose  heart  is  not  dead  to  the  gentle  plead 
ings  af  pity  and  mercy;  and  weigh  heavily 
upon  him  who  in  any,  even  the  least  degree, 
may  divide  the  responsibility  of  an  unfortu 
nate  result  to  either.  I  am  not  insensible  to 
the  weight  of  responsibility  due,  in  that  re- 
195 


196 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


spect,  to  my  relation  to  their  cause.  I  am 
sure,  however,  that  I  should  but  ill  represent 
their  sentiments  and  wishes,  if  I  allowed  my 
self,  in  this  defense  of  their  individual  in 
terests,  wholly  to  lose  sight  of  the  conse 
quences  which  must  follow  to  the  cause  of  con 
stitutional  liberty  in  our  country,  by  sub 
jecting  them  to  a  military  jurisdiction,  to 
which,  by  the  Constitution  and  laws  of  the 
land,  they  are,  in  my  judgment,  clearly  not 
amenable.  The  general  consequences  which 
must  flow  from  such  a  precedent,  give  this 
trial  an  importance  far  above  any  private  in 
terests  involved  in  it;  and  make  my  sense  of 
responsibility  painful  in  the  extreme,  for  fear 
that  "the  good  old  cause"  may  suffer  detriment 
through  some  default  of  mine. 

But  amid  all  these  sources  of  discourage- 1 
ment  and  embarrassment  —  and  there  are  i 
others  which  time  will  not  permit  me  to  no-  I 
tice— I  acknowledge  with  due  thankfulness 
that  there  are  not  wanting  some  great  encour 
agements  and  supports.  Among  these  is  the 
fact  of  publicity.  These  things  are  not  done 
in  a  corner,  nor  under  a  bushel.  They  will 
be  proclaimed  from  the  house-top;  and  read 
and  known  of  all  men.  They  will  be  recon 
sidered  and  rejudged  long  after  they  shall 
have  lost  all  their  importance  to  us  who  are 
now  engaged  in  them.  What  is  right  in  them 
will  be  retained  and  appropriated  by  man 
kind  to  aid  the  great  cause  of  civil  liberty, 
and  advancing  civilization.  What  is  wrong 
will  just  as  certainly  be  condemned  and  re 
jected,  as  useless  or  hurtful  to  the  same  cause, 
by  the  same  judgment.  The  record  which  we 
this  day  make  up  and  complete,  will  go  to  the 
tribunal  of  history — a  tribunal  where  preju 
dice  can  not  wound,  nor  slander  kill.  To  all 
who  earnestly  strive  to  follow  the  path  of 
truth  and  justice  this  day,  the  decisions  of  this 
tribunal  can  bring  neither  harm  nor  shame; 
for  truth  and  justice  are  its  eternal  founda 
tions. 

Nor  am  I  less  encouraged  and  upheld  by 
the  voice  of  history.  The  labor  assigned  me 
will  rest  upon  facts  and  precedents,  handed 
down  to  us  by  the  liberty-loving  race  to  which 
we  belong.  If  these  shall  be  regarded  as  of 
any  authority  in  this  forum,  then  my  labors 
shall  not  be  in  vain.  Success  shall  crown 
them.  The  character  of  the  members  of  this 
Commission,  their  habitual  love  of  constitu 
tional  liberty,  and  of  order  maintained  by 
law,  do  not  permit  me  to  doubt  that  they  will 
carefully  consider  the  great  question  of  juris 
diction;  and,  indeed,  all  other  questions  prop 
erly  before  them,  and  render  an  honest  find 
ing  and  sentence  according  to  the  Constitu 
tion  and  laws  of  the  land.  That  Constitution 
and  those  laws  are  but  the  organization  of  the 
facts  and  precedents  transmitted  to  us  with  our 
blood,  by  our  British  ancestors.  They  are 
mingled  with  our  very  being;  and  permeate 
all  the  channels  of  our  social  and  political 
life.  To  abandon  them,  is  to  give  up  our  social 
and  political  life — is  to  die.  And,  indeed,  in 
this  time  of  national  sickness,  when  the  pub 
lic  mind  is  suffering  under  a  melancholy  and 
morbid  excitement,  amounting  almostto  frenzy, 
it  would  be  madness  to  give  up  the  sure  foun 


dations  of  the  Constitution  and  laws,  and  the 
history  and  customs  of  a  thousand  years  upon 
which  they  rest,  for  any  new-fangled  notion 
born  of  these  evil  times.  It  would  be  like  a 
man,  amid  the  delirium  of  a  fever,  abandon 
ing  the  business  and  habits  of  a  whole  life 
time,  for  a  new  business  and  new  habits  with 
which  he  had  no  acquaintance  whatever.  His 
friends  would  confine  him  in  a  straight 
jacket,  and  send  him  to  a  lunatic  asylum. 

No,  therefore,  it  must  not  be.  The  past  is 
the  only  basis  upon  which  to  reconstruct  the 
present — the  Constitution,  on  which  it  is  pos 
sible  to  reunite  the  belligerent  members  of  this 
once  glorious,  but  now  broken  Union.  But 
we,  who  are  devoted  to  this  great  work  of  re 
construction,  must  not  exhibit  to  all  the  world 
our  utter  disregard  of  its  plainest  provisions, 
and  most  sacred  principles.  We  must  not 
throw  down  and  destroy  the  fences,  which  it 
has  built  about  the  primordial  rights  of  man 
kind  ;  and  then  expect  our  enemies,  or  even 
our  friends  to  believe  us  sincere  in  our  profes 
sions  of  love  for  the  Constitution,  or  desire  to 
restore  the  Union;  for,  by  such  a  course,  we 
shall  become  scarcely  less  guilty  of  treason 
to  our  country,  than  rebels  in  arms  against  it. 
Indeed,  the  only  distinction,  in  such  case, 
would  be  that  which  separates  force  from  fraud; 
and  as  between  two  such  means  to  such  an 
end,  I  am  sure  you  will  agree  with  me  that 
force  is  by  far  the  more  noble  and  manly. 
But  we  stand  opposed  to  both — we  who  stand 
for  our  country;  and  I  am  comforted  to  believe 
that  you  who  have  each  offered  your  lives  for 
its  salvation  from  the  dangers  that  assail  it 
by  force,  will  not  hesitate  to  interpose  your 
justice  to  save  it  from  overthrow  which  may 
threaten  it  under  the  forms  of  law. 

It  is  left  for  others  to  discuss  the  questions 
of  guilt  or  innocence  arising  from  the  testi 
mony  in  its  application  to  the  charges.  I 
have  nothing  to  do  with  it.  Only  so  much  of 
the  evidence  as  tends  to  throw  light  on  the 
question  of  jurisdiction  falls  to  me;  and  I 
shall  refer  to  the  charges  and  specifications  in 
so  far  only  as  they  may  aid  in  the  same  gen 
eral  purpose.  The  argument  I  am  to  make 
would  be  just  as  valid  if  the  guilt  of  the  ac 
cused  stood  admitted,  as  if  their  innocence 
were  established  by  the  proof,  beyond  all 
question. 

There  are  rights  which  belong  to  the  guilty 
as  well  as  to  the  guiltless;  and  among  them 
is  that  of  a  fair  constitutional  and  legal  trial, 
and  all  the  legitimate  consequences  thereof. 
This  right,  among  the  ignorant  and  unthink 
ing,  is  often  lost  sight  of,  and  sometimes  dis 
regarded.  It  is,  nevertheless,  as  important  as 
any  other.  Its  denial  is,  therefore,  a  crime, 
not  only  against  the  individual,  but  also 
against  society  at  large.  To  destroy  a  mur 
derer  or  a  traitor  by  any  other  process  than 
that  prescribed  by  law,  is  as  much  murder  as 
to  kill  the  best  man  in  the  country.  Dr. 
Francis  Lieber  has  well  presented  this  subject 
in  his  treatise  on  Political  Ethics.  He  says: 

"The  State  never  ceases  to  protect;  even  the 
blackest  criminal,  the  moment  before  his  head 
falls,  is  protected.  It  was  a  most  fallacious 
argument  that,  frustra  legis  auxilium  invocat  gui 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


197 


If  gem  committit,  from  the  lex  talionis,  or  as  St. 
John  said  before  the  Lords,  when  he  brought 
in  the  bill  of  attainder  against  the  Earl  of 
Stafford  (April  29,  1641),  'He  that  would  not 
have  others  have  a  law,  why  should  he  have 
any  himself?  '  'Why  should  not  that  be  done 
to  him,  that  he  himself  would  have  done  to 
others?'  Even  modern  writers  have  endeav 
ored  to  derive  the  punitory  power  of  the 
State,  from  the  fact  that  the  offender,  by  doing 
wrong,  declares  himself  out  of  the  jural  soci 
ety.  Nothing  can  be  more  untenable  in  all  its 
bearings.  On  the  contrary,  the  State  being 
especially  a  jural  society,  can  not  possibly  act 
except  by  law,  and  upon  jural  relations,  and 
as  far  as  the  right  of  an  individual  is  the 
condition  of  his  union  with  other  rational 
individuals,  punishment  is  the  right  of  the 
offender,  however  paradoxical  this  may  sound 
at  first,  because  we  are  accustomed  to  imagine 
under  right,  some  specific  privileges.  State 
punishment  is  likewise  the  protection  of  the 
offender,  who,  without  it,  would  be  exposed  to 
all,  even  the  most  extravagant  modes  of  pri 
vate  redress.  No  offender  would  hesitate  to 
acknowledge  and  claim  State  punishment  as 
his  right,  if  the  choice  were  left  him,  between 
State  punishment,  which,  because  it  is  State 
punishment,  requires  a  formal  trial  on  the  one 
band:  and,  on  the  other,  those  summary  pro 
ceedings  against  criminals  caught  flayrantc. 
delicto,  which  we  find,  perhaps,  in  all  early 
codes,  and  sometimes  acknowledged  to  a  very 
late  period  (JJlackstone,  4,  308),  or  to  which  an 
excited  people  sometimes  return,  when  the 
regular  trial  appears  too  slow  for  their  in 
flamed  passions,  as  has  been  the  case  in  those 
riotous  and  illegal  inflictions  of  death  or  other 
punishment,  so  unfortunately  called  lynch 
law  in  our  country.  I  say  unfortunately  called 
lynch  law,  for  it  is  ever  to  be  deplored,  if  any 
illegal  procedure  receives  a  regular  and  sepa 
rate  name  of  its  own.  By  this  very  applica 
tion  of  a  technical  term,  it  assumes  an  air  of 
systematized  authority,  which  has  an  aston 
ishing  effect  upon  the  multitude,  and,  in  fact, 
upon  most  men."  Book  2,  $  345. 

It  is  this  simple  principle  that  makes  it 
murder  for  any  one  to  kill  even  a  man  con 
demned  to  death  by  a  competent  court,  in  a 
different  manner,  or  at  a  different  time  or 
place,  than  may  have  been  fixed  by  the  judg 
ment.  The  law  in  this  respect  makes  no  dif 
ference  between  the  lives  of  the  guilty  and 
the  guiltless.  Hence,  when  men  seek  to  bring 
their  enemies  to  justice  and  punishment  by 
short  and  easy  methods  unknown  to  the  law, 
and,  therefore,  in  violation  thereof,  they  but 
dig  a  pit  into  which  themselves  may,  at  any 
moment,  fall  and  be  lost.  He  who  kills  even 
a  traitor  in  violation  of  law,  kills  at  the  same 
time  the  law  itself. 

Whatever  may  be  your  opinions,  therefore, 
of  the  guilt  or  innocence  of  the  accused,  it 
can  not  effect  the  question  of  jurisdiction. 

The  next  topic  to  which  I  desire  to  call  your 
attention,  arises  from  the  language  of  the 
several  specifications,  and  is  particularly  im 
portant  for  the  purposes  of  this  disciission,  in 
eo  far  as  it  may  apply  to  those  embraced  un 
der  the  last  charge,  namely,  "VIOLATION  OF 


THE  LAWS  OF  WAR."  It  is  this:  that  the  alleged 
offenses  were  committed  "within  the  military 
lines  of  the  army  of  the  United  States,  and 
the  theater  of  military  operations." 

Whatever  may  have  been  the  purpose  of  the 
Judge  Advocate  in  inserting  this  clause,  it  is 
clear  to  any  lawyer  that  no  jurisdiction  can 
arise  from  it,  when  taken  in  connection  with 
the  fact  that  the  accused  are  citizens  of  the 
State  of  Indiana,  a<d  of  the  United  States; 
and  that  Indiana  has  always  sustained  a  rela 
tion  of  loyalty  to  the  Union  and  its  Govern 
ment.  But  even  if  there  was  no  proof  of 
citizenship  of  the  accused,  it  has  not  been 
proven  that  the  State  of  Indiana  is  either 
"within  the  military  lines  of  the  armies  of 
the  United  States,"  or  "the  theater  of  military 
operations."  Had  the  averment  been  that  it 
was  within  the  theater  of  war,  it  would  have 
been  well;  for  the  whole  country  is  the  theater 
of  war.  But  that  can  not  be  said  of  the  lines 
of  the  army,  or  of  the  theater  of  military 
operations.  There  is  no  definition  of  "the 
lines  of  the  army  "  that  extends  so  far  as  is 
here  claimed  by  the  Judge  Advocate;  and  all 
military  writers  which  I  have  been  able  to 
examine,  define  "the  theater  of  operations  " 
as  follows,  contradistinguishing  it  from  the 
theater  of  war: 

"The  theater  of  war  embraces  not  only  the 
territory  of  the  two  belligerent  powers,  but 
also  that  of  their  allies,  and  of  such  second 
ary  powers  as,  through  fear  or  interest,  may 
be  drawn  into  the  contest."  *  *  * 

"The  theater  of  operations,  however,  is  of  a 
more  limited  character,  and  should  not  be  con 
founded  with  the  theater  of  war.  In  general, 
it  includes  only  the  territory  which  an  army 
seeks,  on  the  one  hand,  to  defend,  and  on  the 
other  to  invade."  Hallectis  Elements  of  Military 
Art  and  Science,  p.  44;  Jomini's  Art  of  War,  74,  75. 

I  conclude,  therefore,  that  "the  theater  of 
military  operations,"  of  a  given  army,  must 
be  in  front  of  the  base  of  operations  of  that 
army.  Thus,  the  base  of  operations  of  Gen 
eral  Buell's  army,  during  the  winter  of  1861 
and  the  succeeding  spring,  was  the  Ohio  river; 
and  his  theater  of  operations,  the  whole  coun 
try  south  of  that  base.  And  so  of  other  armies. 
The  base  of  our  operations  has  generally  been 
some  line  separating  friendly  from  hostile 
territory;  and  hence,  "the  theater  of  opera 
tions,"  during  this  war,  has  generally  been 
upon  the  enemy's  soil.  The  sea-coast,  I  know, 
has  frequently,  during  the  present  war,  be 
come  the  base  of  our  operations;  but,  then,  the 
enemy's  country  was  still,  in  every  instance, 
the  theater  of  those  operations.  It  is  useless, 
however,  to  discuss  these  public  and  notorious 
facts;  for  the  citizenship  of  the  accused  ren 
ders  the  attempt  to  make  them  responsible  for 
a  violation  of  the  laws  of  war,  wholly  futile. 
Public  enemies,  only,  are  subject  to  the  laws 
of  war.  The  citizen,  on  the  other  hand,  must 
answer  for  such  acts  as  would,  if  committed 
by  an  enemy,  be  a  transgression  of  the  laws 
and  usages  of  war,  to  his  own  Government, 
according  to  its  own  laws.  I  will  offer  a  sin 
gle  example,  which  I  quote  from  the  autobi 
ography  of  Lieutenant  General  Scott.  It  is 
as  follows: 


198 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


"In  time  of  war  all  persons,  not  citizens  of 
or  owing  allegiance  to  the  United  States  of 
America,  who  shall  be  found  lurking,  as  spies, 
in  or  about  fortifications  or  encampments  of 
the  armies  of  the  United  States,  or  any  of 
them,  shall  suffer  death  according  to  the  law 
and  usage  of  nations,  by  sentence  of  a  gen 
eral  court-martial." 

"'Not  citizens;'  because,  if  citizens,  and 
found  'lurking,'  the  crime  would  be  that  of 
treason — 'adhering  to  [our]  enemies,  giving 
them  aid  and  comfort; '  and  is  so  denned  by 
the  Constitution.''  Vol.  1,  pp.  290,  291. 

But  what  are  "the  laws  of  war?  "  To  whom 
do  they  apply?  The  answer  to  these  questions 
must  forever  put  an  end  to  all  attempts  to  in 
voke  the  aid  of  those  laws,  and  of  the  tribu 
nals  in  which  they  are  administered  for  the 
trial  and  punishment  of  one  of  our  own  citi 
zens;  for  it  must  be  remembered  that  "the 
laws  of  war"  constitute  that  branch  of  inter 
national  law  which  regulates  the  intercourse 
and  conduct  of  belligerent  persons — public 
enemies — with  each  other.  It  is  this  code  that 
condemns  spies,  when  taken,  to  an  infamous 
punishment  at  the  hands  of  their  enemy.  It 
is  for  cruel  breaches  of  this  code,  that  we  are 
sometimes  compelled,  as  a  measure  of  self- 
defense,  to  resort  to  the  cruel  practice  of 
retaliation.  It  is  to  this  code  we  refer  for 
authority  to  punish  guerrillas.  And  so  I  might 
go  on  until  I  had  enumerated  all  its  provi 
sions;  but  I  should  not  find  one  for  the  pun 
ishment  of  one  of  our  own  citizens  among 
them  all,  unless  it  was  established  that  he  had 
first  joined  himself  to,  and  become  part  of  our 
acknowledged  public  adversaries.  These  laws 
of  war  are  international  —  wholly  interna 
tional;  and  do  not  apply  to  the  internal  regu 
lation  of  either  one  of  two  or  more  belligerent 
powers  engaged  in  the  same  contest. 

If,  however,  it  shall  be  said  that  all  persons, 
or  the  great  body  of  them,  engaged  in  the 
present  contest,  on  either  side,  are  citizens  of 
the  United  States;  and,  therefore,  that  a  diffi 
culty  results  in  the  application  of  this  public 
code  to  the  parties,  and  that  what  character 
any  citizen  may  sustain  to  either,  may  not 
always  be  clear,  I  grant  it;  but  what  follows? 
Can  we  give  a  man  a  hostile  character  before 
he  has  openly  espoused  it?  Can  we  strip  him 
of  the  rights  of  citizenship,  before  he  has  ac 
quired  that  relation  to  the  enemy  which  will 
entitle  him  to  the  protection  of  this  code,  as 
well  as  subject  him  to  its  penalties,  in  case  he 
violates  it?  There  must  be  some  general  rule 
on  the  subject;  and  there  can  be  no  other  or 
better  one  than  to  hold  all  persons  resident  in 
the  States  which  have  seceded  and  still  remain 
out  of  the  Union,  as prima  facie  public  enemies; 
and  all  those  who  have  adhered,  and  still  ad 
here,  to  the  Constitution  and  Union,  as  prima 
facie  citizens  of,  and  subject  to  the  laws  and 
authority  of  the  United  States. 

I  know,  indeed,  that  there  are  at  least  two 
States  which  have  hitherto  sustained  an  am 
biguous  relation  to  the  struggle.  I  allude  to 
Kentucky  and  Missouri.  They  have  never 
seceded  by  solemn  act;  and  still  maintain 
their  Constitutional  relation  to  the  Federal 
Government.  But,  then,  they  are  also  repre 


sented  in  the  Confederate  Congress  and  army. 

The   character   of  a    citizen    of  either,   must. 

therefore,  depend  upon  his  conduct;    and  he 

:  must  be  treated  accordingly.     If  he  has  not 

I  joined  the  public  enemy  openly,  but  commits 

a  crime  against  the  Government,  he  is  entitled 

to  be  tried  therefor  by  the  ordinary  courts  of 

the  Union,  in  pursuance  of  the  Constitution 

and  laws.     If  he  has  joined  the  public  enemy 

and  been  taken  in  arms,  or  "lurking  as  a  spy,'' 

\  he  is  entitled  to  be  treated  according  to  "the 

|  laws   of  war:"    in  the   former  case  to  be  ex- 

i  changed  as  a  prisoner  of  war;  in  the  latter,  to 

I  be  hung  for  violating  the  laws  of  war.     And 

this  is  just  what  our  Government  has   been 

doing  during  this  rebellion. 

The  form  of  these  charges  places  the  Gov 
ernment,  then,  in  the  following  attitude  toward 
the  accused,  namely:  As  claiming  them  as  cit 
izens  on  the  one  hand,  but  denying  them  the 
rights  of  citizenship  on  the  other:  as  fixing 
upon  them,  for  the  purposes  of  this  trial,  and 
the  punishment  and  infamy  that  may  follow 
it,  the  character  of  public  enemies,  on  the  one 
hand;  but  denying  them  any  of  the  advan 
tages  resulting  from  that  character,  on  the 
other.  Such  a  course,  I  submit,  is  unheard  of 
in  the  judicial  proceedings  of  our  counti-y; 
and  with  all  deference  to  my  friend,  the  Judge 
Advocate,  is,  in  my  opinion,  wholly  inadmis 
sible.  I  have  little  apprehension,  therefore, 
that  you  will  claim  jurisdiction  of  the  accused 
on  the  ground  that  they  are  guilty  of  a  viola 
tion  of  the  laws  of  war;  and,  by  consequence, 
public  enemies.  If  you  sustain  your  juris 
diction  at  all,  it  must,  therefore,  be  upon  the 
basis  of  martial  law. 

I  beg  leave  to  call  your  attention  to  a  fact, 
in  evidence,  which  must  exercise  an  important 
influence  upon  your  judgment  on  the  ques 
tion:  Whether  martial  law  is,  or  has  been,  in 
force  in  the  State  of  Indiana,  or  not?  and,  of 
course,  upon  that  of  your  jurisdiction.  I 
allude,  of  course,  to  the  fact  that  the  courts, 
both  of  the  State  and  of  the  United  States, 
within  the  State  of  Indiana,  have  never,  at 
any  time,  during  the  present  rebellion,  been 
thereby  shut  up,  and  the  course  of  justice 
therein  disturbed  and  stopped;  but  that  those 
tribunals  have  all  along  remained  open,  and 
engaged  in  the  administration  of  justice;  and 
capable  of  enforcing  their  judgments,  orders, 
and  decrees,  according  to  the  established  laws 
of  the  land.  This  fact  was  not  proven  in  Mr. 
Dodds  case.  His  escape  cut  off  all  evidence 
in  his  defense;  and,  of  course,  this  fact  among 
others.  Upon  this  fact,  however,  and  a  more 
thorough  argument,  I  build  my  hopes  of  an 
ultimate  decision  against  the  jurisdiction.  In 
pressing  the  argument  and  giving  utterance 
to  these  hopes,  I  beg  leave  to  say  for  myself, 
and  for  those  whom  I  represent,  that  our  ob 
jection  to  the  jurisdiction  does  not  spring 
from  any  objection  to  the  individual  members 
of  the  Court  as  fair-minded  and  honorable 
gentlemen,  and  worthy  to  sit  in  judgment 
upon  any  man  in  the  land,  subject,  under  the 
Constitution  and  laws,  to  their  authority.  It 
is,  on  the  other  hand,  simply  because  as  citi 
zens,  in  no  wise  connected  with  the  military 
or  naval  service  of  the  United  States,  the 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


199 


accused  are  not  within  any  military  jurisdic 
tion  whatever.  They  claim  the  right  to  be  tried 
by  oneof  the  constitutional  lourtsof  theircoun- 
try,  and  by  a  jury  thereof.  They  ask  justice 
at  the  hands  of  their  peers  of  the  District  of 
the  State  of  Indiana.  For  justice  is  properly 
justice  only  when  legal,  constitutional,  and  just 
means  are  employed  in  the  attainment  of  legal, 
constitutional,  and  just  ends.  Your  findings 
may  correspond  precisely  with  what  would  be 
those  of  a  jury  of  the  country;  but  if  you 
lack  jurisdiction — the  right  to  find  at  all  in 
the  premises — it  would  be  a  mockery  to  call 
them,  or  any  subsequent  proceedings  thereon, 
justice.  Justice  must  have  a  right  origin,  or 
it  can  not,  exist.  If  what  is  called  justice 
proceed  from  a  tribunal  without  authority,  it 
is  injustice,  outrage,  crime;  and,  if  it  reach 
the  life  of  him  who  is  made  its  subject,  it  is 
murder.  3  Co.  Inst.,  p.  52;  I  Hole's  His.  C.  P., 
p.  6,  499-501;  4  El.  Com.,  178;  and  4  State 
Trials,  p.  129. 

A  good  citizen  will  not  accept  even  a  favor 
able  judgment  at  the  hands  of  an  unauthor 
ized  tribunal,  much  less  an  adverse  one; 
because  it  involves  the  overthrow  of  the  laws 
and  government  of  his  country,  on  which  all 
rights,  whether  of  person  or  property,  depend. 
A  good  State,  alive  to  a  proper  sense  of  its 
duty  ttnd  dignity,  will  never  allow  him  to  ac 
cept  the  one,  nor  to  be  made  the  victim  of  the 
other. 

Has  this  Commission,  then,  jurisdiction  of 
this  cause  ?  May  it  rightfully,  lawfully,  con- 
stitutionally  try  the  accused  upon  the  charges 
and  specifications  exhibited  against  them  ? 
If  it  may,  whence  does  it  derive  its  authority 
for  that  purpose? 

I  urn  here,  to-day,  to  endeavor  to  answer 
these  questions.  Yoii  are  here,  to-day,  to 
judge  whether  I  give  the  true  response,  or  not. 
That  you  may  "  the  better  judge,"  I  ask  your 
attention,  your  candor,  and  your  patience. 

I  do  not  believe  that  you  will  hold,  as  was 
maintained  before  you  on  a  former  occasion, 
that  you  are  precluded  from  going  into  the 
question  of  jurisdiction  by  the  mere  order  of 
the  General  convening  this  Commission,  and 
that  sending  the  accused  before  you  "for 
trial."  That  I  may  not  misrepresent  the  posi 
tion  taken  by  the  learned  Judge  Advocate, 
upon  this  point,  I  beg  leave  to  quote  the  entire 
paragraph.  It  is  as  follows  : 

"When  General  Hovey  convened  this  Com 
mission  within  the  limits  of  his  jurisdiction, 
and  committed  the  case  of  Harrison  H.  Dodd, 
the  accused,  to  this  Commission  to  try  it,  by 
virtue  of  his  military  power,  acting  under  the 
authority  that  was  given  to  him  by  the  Com 
mander-in-chief  of  the  Army,  namely,  the 
President  of  the  United  States,  he  suspended 
the  civil  law,  and  put  in  operation  the  military, 
or  martiallaw.  The  officers  of  this  Commission 
could  not,  under  the  oath  that  they  have  taken, 
refuse  to  obey  the  orders  of  the  officers  placed 
over  them.  They  could  not  stop  and  go  back 
of  that  order,  and  refuse  to  hear  and  determ 
ine  this  case." 

Now,  whatever  may  have  been  your  deci 
sion  in  that  case  upon  the  question  of  jurisdic 
tion,  I  am  very  certain  that  you  did  not  adopt 


the  doctrine  of  this  paragraph.  I  know  you 
do  not,  and  can  not  hold  to  the  slavish  and 
shameful  notion,  that  you  sit  here  to  do  what 
ever  the  commanding  General  may  order. 
Obedience  of  the  inferior  to  the  superior  is 
for  the  field,  the  march,  the  camp,  the  desk  ; 
and  even  there  it  has  its  limits.  The  law  does 
not  require  obedience  any-where  in  contraven 
tion  of  its  own  provisions.  You  are  sworn  to 
obey  the  "lawful"  commands  of  your  supe 
riors  ;  and  there  your  obligation  ceases.  The 
employment  of  the  word  "lawful"  (Art.  War, 
Sec.  9),  clearly  excludes  the  idea  of  obedience 
to  all  but  such  commands.  The  unlawful 
order  of  a  superior,  even  the  highest,  can  not 
be  given  in  evidence  in  justification  of  a  tres 
pass — much  less  of  a  felony.  Can  obedience, 
then,  extend  to  the  duties  of  the  conrt  room, 
and  subordinate  the  justice  which,  in  your 
judicial  capacity,  your  are  to  administer 
there?  If  it  does,  what  a  mockery  is  all  mili 
tary  justice  !  Who  would,  or  could  consent  to 
sit  as  a  member  of  a  military  court,  and  pass 
judgment  vipon  the  lives  and  fortunes  of  his 
fellow-men,  when  his  own  convictions  of  the 
law  and  the  facts,  in  the  case,  were  to  have  no 
control  over  his  decisions! 

"I  had  sooner  be  a  dog  and  bay  at  the  moon." 

Held  on  such  terms,  your  commissions  would 
be  but  badges  of  the  most  odious  and  wicked 
servitude.  Every  free  mind  that  has  not  quite 
escaped  the  direction  of  conscience,  must 
reject  such  a  position  with  indignation  and 


horror!      I  think 
such  a  pi-oposal  : 


I  hear  you   exclaiming   at 
No;  let  the   General  go  di 


rectly  to  his  purposes,  and  punish  whom  he 
will,  and  as  he  will,  without'the  deceitful  and 
wicked  pretense  of  a  trial.  I  will  brave  all 
consequences  sooner  than  thus  surrender  my 
manhood.  He  shall  never  employ  me  in  a 
mockery  so  foul,  and  so  cruel ! "  Every  hon 
orable  mind  would  so  feel  and  so  speak ; 
and  none,  I  am  sure,  more  promptly  and 
warmly  than  my  distinguished  friend,  the 
General,  who  now  commands  this  district  ; 
and  under  whose  authority  you  sit.  For,  if  it 
is  all  a  matter  of  command  and  obedience, 
then  let  the  command  and  its  execution  stand 
together,  without  the  intervention  of  this  hol 
low  form  of  justice.  Do  not  mock  the  pre 
destined  victims  with  the  delusive  hopes 
arising  from  the  forms  of  a  trial,  that,  from 
first  to  last,  on  this  theory,  can  not  rise 
higher  than  a  miserable  trick  to  deceive  the 
looker-on ;  and  divide  the  responsibility  of 
acts  not  capable  of  justification,  when  placed 
before  the  world  in  their  true  light.  Indeed, 
on  such  a  theory,  you  do  not  constitute  a 
court  at  all,  in  any  received  sense  of  the 
term;  for  "a  court  is  a  place  where  justice  is 
judicially  administered." 

With  these  observations,  I  shall  deliver  this 
topic  to  your  consideration  and  judgment. 

I  am  thus  brought  at  last  to  the  discussion 
of  martial  law,  as  the  basis,  and,  indeed,  the 
only  basis  on  which  your  jurisdiction  of  the 
present  cause  can  possibly  be  sustained.  If 
martial  law  does,  in  fact,  exist  in  the  State  of 
Indiana,  you  may  have  jurisdiction.  If  it 
does  not,  you  do  not,  and  can  not  possibly  pos- 


200 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


Bess  such  jurisdiction.  The  question,  there 
fore,  recurs  upon  us: 

Has  martial  law  an  actual  existence  in  the 
State  of  Indiana  to-day?  If  so,  how  has  it 
received  such  existence?  Does  it  exist  by 
proclamation,  by  law,  or  by  necessity?  If  by 
proclamation,  or  law,  when  was  the  proclama 
tion  made,  or  the  law  passed?  If  by  neces 
sity,  when  did  that  necessity  arise;  and 
wherein  does  it  consist  ? 

As  the  first  step  toward  a  satisfactory  an 
swer  to  these  questions,  let  us  determine  what 
martial  law  really  is ;  for  this  is  still  a  ques 
tion.  This  question  I  propose  to  answer  from 
the  books.  Smith  says  : 

"  Martial  law  is  the  law  of  war.  that  depends 
on  the  just,  but  arbitrary  power  of  the  King 
or  his  lieutenant;  for,  though  the  King  doth 
not  make  any  law  but  by  common  consent  in 
Parliament,  yet  in.  time  of  war,  by  reason  of 
the  necessity  of  it,  to  guard  against  dangers 
that  often  arise,  he  useth  absolute  power,  so 
that  his  word  is  law."  Smith  on  the  English  Re 
public,  book  2,  chap.  4. 

Sir  Matthew  Hale,  in  his  History  of  the  Com 
mon  Law,  says : 

"  Martial  laiv  is  not,  in  truth  and  reality,  a 
law,  but  something  indulged  rather  than 
allowed  as  a  law;  the  necessity  of  govern 
ment,  order,  and  discipline  in  an  army  is  that 
only  which  gives  these  laws  any  countenance." 
1  Sis,  C.  L.,  p.  54. 

I  make  this  quotation,  not  because,  in  the 
present  state  of  opinion  and  law,  either  in 
En gland  or  America,  it  gives  us  a  very  pre 
cise  arid  accurate  notion  of  martial  law;  but 
in  oi'der  to  bring  it  into  relation  to  a  criticism 
which,  when  tafcen  in  connection  with  the 
state  of  British  militai*y  law  at  the  time  the 
venerable  Hale  wrote,  is,  in  my  opinion,  en 
tirely  unjust;  and,  to  show  that,  at  that  time, 
this  definition  was  as  accurate  and  complete 
as  could  be  given.  The  criticism  to  which  I 
refer  is  that  of  the  late  Attorney  General 
dishing.  He  says : 

"This  proposition  is  a  mere  composite  blun 
der — a  total  misapprehension  of  the  matter. 
It  confounds  martial  law  and  military  law;  it 
ascribes  to  the  former  the  uses  of  the  latter ; 
it  erroneously  assumes  that  the  government 
of  a  body  of  troops  is  a  necessity,  more  than 
that  of  a  body  of  civilians,  or  citizens.  It 
confounds  and  confuses  all  the  relations  of 
the  subject,  and  is  an  apt  illustration  of  the 
incompleteness  of  the  notions  of  the  common- 
law  jurists  of  England  in  regard  to  matters 
not  comprehended  in  "that  limited  branch  of 
legal  science."  8  Opinions  of  the  Atfys  Gen., 
365,  et  seq. 

Now,  I  beg  leave  to  say,  that  Sir  Matthew 
Hale  was  not  a  mere  common-law  lawyer.  His 
writings  show  him  to  have  been  familiar  with 
the  civil  law;  and  to  have  read  extensively 
the  Continental  writers  on  public  law.  Nor 
is  it  true  that  his  observations  on  the  nature 
and  uses  of  martial  law  constitute  a  mere 
"composite  blunder" — "a  total  misapprehen 
sion  of  the  question."  The  "blunder,"  on  the 
contrary,  is  on  the  part  of  the  learned  At 
torney  General;  and  not  on  that  of  the  ven 
erable  Chief  Justice.  It  will  be  apparent  that 


I  am  right,  if  we  refer  to  the  state  of  Eng 
land  and  English  military  law  at  the  time  the 
History  of  the  Cordon  Law  was  written.  Its 
author  died  in  1076.  Up  to  that  time  England 
had  properly  no  military  code.  Her  armies 
were  really  subject  to  such  laws  as  the  King 
might  impose,  where  a  limit  upon  his  will,  in 
this  respect,  had  not  been  fixed  by  Parliament. 
It  was  not  until  after  Hale  wrote,  and  had 
been  gathered  to  his  fathers,  that  the  first  mil 
itary  bill  was  passed,  and  military  law  thereby 
placed  upon  a  different  footing  from  that  of 
martial  law.  The  will'  of  the  King,  until  then, 
was  the  law  of  the  army — a  will  regulated, 
indeed,  by  the  principles  of  the  civil  law; 
but,  even,  in  that,  respect,  controlled  no  fur 
ther  than  he  chose;  and  this  will  is  the  same, 
whether  applied  to  soldiers  or  civilians.  "It 
is  not,  in  truth  and  reality,  a  law."  It  was, 
nevertheless,  pretty  much  all  the  law  known 
to  the  British  army  in  the  time  of  Hale.  1 
Bl.  Com.,  chap.  13;  2  Sullivan's  Lectures,  p.  257. 
In  this  view  of  the  facts  of  history,  and  the 
state  of  military  law  when  Hale  wrote,  the 
learned  Attorney  General  seems  to  be  guilty 
of  the  blunder  which  he  attributes  to  the 
Chief  Justice. 

The  first  member  of  Mr.  Stephens'  defini 
tions  of  martial  law  is  sufficiently  accurate. 
He  says : 

"  Martial  law  may  be  defined  as  the  law 
(whatever  it  may  be),  which  is  imposed  by 
military  power."  2  Com.  Laws  of  England, 
p.  561. 

The  Duke  of  Wellington  was  also  right 
when  he  defined  it  thus: 

"Martial  law  is  neither  more  nor  less  than 
the  will  of  the  General  who  commands  the 
army."  Hansard's  Debates,  (3d  series),  vol. 
115,  p.  880. 

And  again  when  he  wrote  as  follows: 

"Military  law"  [i.  e.,  martial  law~\,  "as  ap 
plied,  to  any  persons  excepting  officers,  sol 
diers,  and  followers  of  the  army,  for  whose 
government  there  are  particular  provisions 
of  law,  in  all  well  regulated  countries,  is 
neither  more  nor  less  than  the  will  of  the  Gen 
eral  of  the  army.'1  Dispatches,  vol.  6,  p.  43. 

The  distinction  between  martial  and  military 
law  is,  in  this  last  definition,  made  plain,  the 
latter  being  confined  to  provisions  of  law  for 
the  regulation  of  the  army;  and  the  former  to 
such  as  the  will  of  the  General  may  impose 
upon  those— not  soldiers — under  martial  law. 

Earl  Grey,  in  discussing  the  questions 
growing  out  of  a  declaration  of  martial  law 
in  Ceylon,  again  expresses  the  idea  with  suf 
ficient  accuracy.  He  says: 

"What  is  called  pi-oclaiming  martial  law,  is 
no  law  at  all;  butmcrely  forthe  sake  of  public 
safety,  in  circumstances  of  great  emergency, 
setting  aside  all  law  and  acting  under  military 
power;  a  proceeding  which  requires  to  bo  fol 
lowed  up  by  an  act  of  indemnity  when  the 
disturbances  are  at  an  end."  Hough ' s  Prec.  in 
Mil.  Law,  p.  515. 

Judge-Advocate-Gcneral  Dundas,  in  writing 
upon  the  subject,  says: 

" Martial  law  is  not  a  written  law;  it  arises 
on  a  necessity  to  be  judged  of  by  the  Execu 
tive,  and  ceases  the  instant  it  can  possibly  be 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


201 


allowed  to  cease.  Military  law  has  to  do  only 
with  the  land  forces  of  thA^rown,  mentioned 
in  the  second  section  of  tlPMutiny  Act.  Mar 
tial  law  comprises  all  persons,  all  are  under  »!/, 
whether  they  be  civil  or  military."  Second  Rep. 
on  Ceylon,  Hough,  supra,  p.  535. 

"When  martial  law  is  proclaimed,"  says 
Hough,  "courts-martial  are  thereby  vested 
with  such  a  summary  proceeding,  that  neither 
time,  place  nor  persons  are  considered.  Ne 
cessity  is  the  only  rule  of  conduct;  nor  are 
the  punishments  which  courts-martial  may 
inflict  under  such  authority  limited  to"  such 
as  are  prescribed  by  law.  Hough  on  Courts- 
Martial,  p.  383. 

Captain  Benet,  in  his  treatise  on  Military  Law 
and  Courts-Martial,  in  speaking  of  martial  laiv, 
says : 

"  Martial  Jaw,  then,  is  that  military  rule  and 
authority  which  exists  in  time  of  war,  and  is 
conferred  by  the  laws  of  war,  in  relation  to 
persons  and  things,  under  and  loithin  the  scope 
of  active  military  operations  in  carrying  on  the 
war,  and  which  extinguishes  or  suspends  civil  rights, 
and  the  remedies  founded  upon  them  for  the  time 
being,  so  far  as  it  may  appear  to  be  necessary, 
in  order  to  the  full  accomplishment  of  the  pur 
pose  of  the  war,  the  party  exercising  it  being 
liable  in  an  action  for  any  abuse  of  the  au 
thority  thus  conferred.  It  is  the  application 
of  military  government — the  government  of 
force — to  persons  and  property  within  the 
scope  of  it,  according  to  the  laws  and  usages 
of  war,  to  the  exclusion  of  municipal  govern 
ment,  in  all  respects  where  the  latter  would 
impair  the  efficiency  of  military  law,  or  mili 
tary  action."  Benet  on  Mil.  Law  and  Courts- 
Martial,  p.  14. 

The  late  Commander-in-chief  of  the  Army 
of  the  United  States,  Major  General  Halleck, 
observes: 

"We  remark,  in  conclusion,  that  the  right 
to  declare,  apply  and  exercise  martial  law,  is 
one  of  the  rights  of  sovereignty,  and  is  as  es 
sential  to  the  existence  of  a  State,  as  is  the 
right  to  declare  or  carry  on  war.  It  is  one 
of  the  incidents  of  war,  and,  like  the  power 
to  take  human  life  in  battle,  results  directly 
and  immediately  from  the  fact  that  war  le 
gally  exists.  It  is  a  power  inherent  in  every 
government,  and  must  be  regarded  and  recog 
nized  by  all  other  governments,  but  the  ques 
tion  of  the  authority  of  any  particular  func 
tionary  to  exercise  this  power,  is  a  matter  to 
be  determined  by  local,  and  not  by  interna 
tional  law.  Like  a  declaration  of  siege,  or 
blockade,  the  power  of  the  officer  who  makes 
it,  is  to  be  presumed  until  disavowed;  and 
neutrals  who  attempt,  in  derogation  of  that 
authority,  do  so  at  their  peril."  International 
Laio  and  Laws  of  War,  p.  380. 

Again,  he  says : 

"The  English  common  law  authorities  gen 
erally  confound  martial  with  military  law ;  and, 
consequently,  throw  very  little  light  upon  the 
subject,  considered  as  a  domestic  fact;  and  in 
parliamentary  debates  it  has  usually  been 
discussed  as  a  fact,  rather  than  as  forming 
any  part  of  their  system  of  jurisprudence. 
Nevertheless,  there  are  numerous  instances 
in  which  martial  law  lias  been  declared  and 


enforced,  in  time  of  rebellion  or  insurrection, 
not  only  in  India,  and  British  Colonial  Pos 
sessions,  but  also  in  England  and  Ireland.  It 
seems  that  no  act  of  Parliament  is  required 
to  precede  such  declaration,  although  it  is 
usually  followed  by  an  act  of  indemnity, 
when  the  disturbances  which  called  it  forth 
are  at  an  end,  in  order  to  give  constitutional  exist 
ence  to  the  fact  of  martial  law."  Id.,  374. 

I  desire  to  remark,  in  passing,  that  a  care 
ful  study  of  the  English  authorities  alluded 
to,  will,  perhaps,  explain  them,  and  show  that 
their  confusion  is  only  apparent,  in  relation 
to  this  subject.  In  the  first  place,  as  already 
shown,  the  English  had  no  distinct  system  of 
military  law  until  after  the  revolution  of  1G88; 
and  before  that  time,  their  armies  were  sub 
ject,  in  a  great  degree,  to  simple  martial  law. 
It  is  true,  the  King's  will  was,  in  some  meas 
ure,  restrained  by  statute.  In  the  second,  as 
the  only  ground  upon  which  that  will — martial 
law — can  apply  to  others  than  soldiers  within 
the  kingdom,  is  that  of  necessity,  it  was  both 
natural  and  philosophical  for  them  to  regard  it 
as  simply  a  fact.  Indeed,  it  is  nothing  else 
but  a  fact  both  in  its  origin  and  its  applica 
tion.  It  originates  in  necessity,  which  is  a 
fact.  It  is  the  will  of  the  commanding  gen 
eral,  who  always  determines  its  extent  and  the 
mode  of  its  application.  It  will  thus  assume 
a  different  form — will  be  more  or  less  sweep 
ing — cruel  or  merciful,  according  to  the  exi 
gency  of  each  particular  instance  of  its  exer 
cise,  as  well  as  the  character  and  temper  of 
him  who  administers  it.  A  thing  thus  vari 
ant  and  uncertain  can  not  be  allowed  as  a 
law;  for  a  law  must  be  a  rule  prescribed, 
must  be  uniform  in  its  application,  which  can 
never  be  said  of  any  thing  resulting  from 
mere  necessity,  and  subject  for  its  measure 
and  duration  to  mere  human  will.  The  only 
element,  common  to  such  a  state  of  administra 
tion  and  law,  is  that  both  are  applied  to  the 
affairs  of  men.  It  will,  therefore,  be  subject, 
of  course,  to  the  judgment  of  public  opinion 
as  all  other  facts  are,  in  which  moral  agents 
and  relations  are  involved;  but  whatever  re 
straint  that  imposes,  can  not  change  the  fact 
into  a  law.  Nor,  it  would  seem,  does  the  right, 
of  a  belligerent  depend  upon  the  legality  of 
the  war,  as  remarked  by  General  Halleck.  On 
the  contrary,  we  might  naturally  suppose  that 
he  who  entered  upon  an  illegal  and  unjust 
war,  would  be  most  likely  to  avail  himself 
first  of  |he  advantages  of  martial  law,  which, 
in  the  language  of  Mr.  Adams,  would  "sweep 
the  laws  of  his  adversary  by  the  board,"  and 
substitute  his  discretion  therefor.  Hence,  up 
on  the  whole,  I  see  no  reason  why  the  learned 
general  should  criticise  the  English.  The 
last  two  authors  cited,  seemingly  without  per 
ceiving  it,  confine  the  operation  of  martial  law 
to  the  territory  of  public  enemies,  or  to  the 
immediate  theater  of  military  operations.  In 
either  view,  their  remarks  are  inapplicable  to 
our  condition  here;  for  we  may  admit  the 
most  unbounded  authority  to  exercise  martial 
larv  in  our  generals,  in  carrying  on  a  foreign 
war  in  an  enemy's  country;  or  in  a  domestic 
war  "  within  the  scope  of  active  military  operations," 
and  it  will  not  follow  that  any  such  authority 


202 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


can  exist  in  a  State  devoted  to  the  Govern 
ment,  and  in  no  sense  the  theater  of  "active 
military  operations."  In  the  foreign  country, 
the  citizen  will  be  subject  to  international 
law;  and  our  public  enemy  can  not  look  be 
yond  that  to  see  whether,  in  the  exercise  of 
martial  law,  we  disregard  our  own  Constitution. 
At  home,  the  fact  of  war  and  the  immediate 
presence  of  hostile  armies  puts  an  end  to  all 
other  laws;  and  martial  law,  for  the  time  be 
ing,  exists  by  necessity.  Military  power  is 
rather,  in  such  case,  a  law  to  itself.  They 
leave  us,  therefore,  in  quite  as  much  doubt 
and  confusion,  so  far  as  the  case  in  hand  is 
concerned,  as  they  found  us. 

I  beg  your  pardon  for  introducing  here,  a 
little  out  of  place,  the  observations  upon 
martial  law  of  some  of  our  own  leading  politi 
cians.  I  say  politicians  advisedly ;  for  I  do 
not  think  that  they  were  generally  actuated  in 
the  utterance  of  these  opinions  by  the  motives 
that  should  govern  statesmen ;  and  I  do  not 
think  so,  because  the  whole  spirit  of  the  de 
bates  in  which  they  were  delivered,  was  of  a 
most  decided  and  even  bitter  partisan  tone. 
I  allude  to  the  debates  on  remitting  the  fine 
imposed  by  Judge  Hall  upon  General  Jack 
son,  at  New  Orleans,  in  1815,  for  contempt  of 
court  in  refusing  obedience  to  a  writ  of  habeas 
corpus.  Democrats  in  Congress  were  in  favor 
of  the  measure;  while  most,  if  not  all  the 
Whigs,  were  opposed  to  it.  Mr.  John  Q. 
Adams,  then  in  the  House  of  Representatives, 
made  it  an  occasion  for  striking  at  both  the 
Democratic  party  and  slavery.  He  maintained 
that  the  measure  was  a  hobby,  on  which  lead 
ing  Democrats  were  seeking  to  elevate  them 
selves  to  the  Presidency  upon  General  Jack 
son's  popularity;  and  then  turned  upon  the 
slaveholders  of  the  South,  and  reminded  them 
how  easy  it  would  be,  in  some  fit  emergen 
cy,  to  employ  martial  law  for  the  abolition 
of  slavery.  And  such  generally  was  the 
spirit  of  the  debate;  a  spirit,  one  would  think, 
little  calculated  to  render  opinions  remarka 
ble  for  their  legal  accuracy.  It  was  in  this 
debate  that  Mr.  Adams  said: 

"  The  power  of  Congress  " — the  power  to  de 
clare  martial  law — "  has,  perhaps,  never  been 
called  into  exercise  under  the  present  Consti 
tution.  But  when  the  laws  of  war  are  in 
force,  what,  I  ask,  is  one  of  those  laws?  It  is 
this :  that  when  a  country  is  invaded,  and  two  hos 
tile  armies  are  met  in  martial  array,  the  com 
manders  of  both  armies  have  power  to  eman 
cipate  all  the  slaves  in  the  invaded  territory. 

"And  here  I  recur  again  to  the  example  of 
General  Jackson.  What  are  you  about  in 
Congress?  You  are  about  passing  a  law  to  re 
fund  to  General  Jackson,  the  amount  of  a  cer 
tain  fine  imposed  upon  him  by  a  judge  under  the 
laws  of  Louisiana.  You  are  going  to  refund  him 
the  money  with  interest,  and  this  you  are  going 
to  do,  because  the  imposition  of  the  fine  was  un 
just.  And  why  was  it  unjust?  Because 
General  Jackson  was  acting  under  the  laws 
of  war;  and  because  the  moment  you  place  a 
military  commander  in  a  district  that  is  the 
theater  of  war,  the  laws  of  war  apply  to  that 
place. 

"I  might  furnish  a  thousand  proofs  to  show 


that  the  pretensions  of  the  gentlemen  to  the 
sanctity  of  their  municipal  institutions,  un 
der  a  state  of  a4^ial  invasion,  and  actual 
war,  •  whether  servile,  civil,  or  foreign,  is 
wholly  unfounded,  and  that  the  laws  of  war 
do,  in  all  such  cases,  take  precedence.  I  lay 
this  down  as  the  law  of  nations.  I  say,  the 
military  authority  takes,  for  the  time,  the 
place  of  all  municipal  institutions,  and  of 
slavery  among  the  rest;  and  that,  under  that 
state  of  things,  so  far  from  its  being  true,  that 
the  States  where  slavery  exists  have  the  ex 
clusive  management  of  the  subject,  not  only 
the  President  of  the  United  States,  but  the 
commander  of  the  army,  has  power  to  order 
the  universal  emancipation  of  the  slaves.  I 
have  given  here  more  in  detail  a  principle 
which  I  have  asserted  on  this  floor  before 
now;  and  of  which  I  have  no  more  doubt 
than  that  you,  sir,  occupy  that  chair." 

In  the  course  of  the  same  debates,  Mr.  Bu 
chanan,  taking  it  for  granted  that  General 
Jackson  had  done  no  more  than  his  duty  in 
declaring  martial  law  in  New  Orleans,  in  1814 
and  1815,  said: 

"If  General  Jackson  did  no  more  than  his 
duty  in  declaring  martial  law,  the  moment  that 
declaration  was  made,  the  official  functions  of 
Judge  Hall  ceased,  with  regard  to  his  power 
of  issuing  writs  of  habeas  corpus,  which  might 
interfere  with  the  defense  of  the  city.  As 
soon  as  martial  law  was  in  force,  every  citizen 
of  New  Orleans,  whether  sustaining  an  official 
character  or  not,  was  bound  to  submit  to  it. 
#  -:s-  *  For  it  was  quite  a  plain  case,  that, 
if  martial  law  did  not  supersede  and  put  in 
abeyance  the  civil  power,  it  would  be  wholly 
insufficient  in  attaining  the  only  objects  for 
which  alone  it  could  be  tolerated  or  justified." 

Mr.  Douglas,  in  the  House  of  Representa 
tives,  maintained  the  same  principles;  but, 
from  his  statement  of  the  case,  confined  their 
operation  to  the  defense  of  the  city;  in  other 
words,  to  a  state  of  siege.  Among  other  things, 
he  said: 

"I  maintain  that,  in  the  exercise  of  the  power 
of  proclaiming  martial  law,  General  Jackson  did 
not  violate  the  Constitution,  nor  assume  to  him 
self  any  authority  not  fully  authorized  and 
legalized  by  his  position,  his  duty  and  the  ne 
cessity  of  the  case.  General  Jackson  was  the 
agent  of  the  Government,  legally  and  constitu 
tionally  authorized  to  defend  the  city  of  New 
Orleans.  It  was  his  duty  to  do  this  at  all  hazards. 
It  was  then  conceded,  and  is  now  conceded,  that 
nothing  but  martial  law  would  enable  him  to 
perform  that  duty.  His  power  was  commen 
surate  with  his  duty,  and  he  was  authorized 
to  use  the  means  essential  to  its  performance. 
This  principle  has  been  recognized  and  acted 
upon  by  all  civilized  nations,  and  is  familiar 
to  all  who  are  conversant  with  military  his 
tory.  It  does  not  imply  the  right  to  suspend  the 
laws  and  civil  tribunals  at  pleasure.  The  right 
grows  out  of  the  necessity.  The  principle  is  that 
the  commanding  General  may  go  as  far,  and 
no  further  than  is  absolutely  necessary  to  the 
defense  of  the  place  committed  to  his  protec 
tion.  There  are  exigences  in  the  history  of 
nations,  when  necessity  becomes  the  para 
mount  law,  to  which  all  other  considerations 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


203 


must  yield.  If  it  becomes  necessary  to  blow 
up  a  fort,  it  is  right  to  do  it.  If  it  is  necessary 
to  sink  a  ship,  it  is  rightto  sink  it.  If  it  is 
necessary  to  burn  a  city,  it  is  right  to  burn 
it."  Life  and  Speeches  of  Senator  Douglas,  pp. 
25,  26. 

And  so  I  might  go  on,  adding  opinions  and 
definitions  of  martial  law  to  endless  extent.  I 
will  quote  but  one  more;  and  that  is  the 
opinion  of  Attorney  General  Gushing,  already 
referred  to.  He  says: 

"Martial  law,  a,s  exercised  in  any  country  by 
the  commander  of  a  foreign  army,  is  an  ele 
ment  of  the  jus  belli.  It  is  incidental  to  a  state 
of  solemn  war,  and  appertains  to  the  law  of 
nations.  The  commander  of  the  invading, 
occupying,  or  conquering  army,  rules  the  in 
vaded,  occupied,  or  conquered  foreign  country, 
with  supreme  power,  limited  only  by  interna 
tional  law,  and  the  orders  of  the  sovereign  or 
government  he  serves  or  represents.  For  by 
the  law  of  nations,  the  occupaiio  bellica,  in  a 
just  war,  transfers  the  sovereign  power  of  the 
enemy's  country  to  the  conqueror."  Wolff's 
Jus  Gentium,  $  255;  Grotius  De  Jure  et  Pads,  ed. 
Cocccii,  lib.  iii,  cap.  8. 

Such  occupation  by  right  of  war  is,  so  long 
as  it  is  military  only,  that  is,  flagrante  bello,  will 
be  the  cas-e  put  by  the  Duke  of  Wellington,  of 
all  the  powers  of  the  government  resumed  in 
the  hands  of  the  commander-in-chief.  If  any 
local  authority  continue  to  exist,  it  will  be 
with  his  permission  only,  and  with  the  power 
to  do  nothing,  except  what  in  his  plenary  dis 
cretion,  or  his  own  sovereign,  through  him, 
shall  see  fit  to  authorize.  The  law  of  the 
land  will  have  ceased  to  possess  any  proper 
vigor. 

Thus,  while  the  armies  of  the  United  States 
occupied  different  provinces  of  the  Mexican 
Republic,  the  respective  commanders  were  not 
limited  in  authority  by  any  local  law.  They 
allowed,  or  rather  required,  the  magistrates 
of  the  country,  municipal  or  judicial,  to  con 
tinue  to  administer  the  laws  of  the  country 
among  their  own  countrymen,  but  in  subjec 
tion  always  to  the  military  power,  which  acted 
summarily  and  according  to  discretion,  when 
the  belligerent  interests  of  the  conqueror  re 
quired  it,  and  which  exercised  jurisdiction, 
either  summarily  or  by  means  of  military 
commissions,  for  the  protection  or  punishment  of 
citizens  of  the  United  States  in  Mexico. 

That,  it  would  seem,  was  one  of  the  forms 
of  martial  law.  A  violent  state  of  things,  to 
cease,  of  course,  when  hostilities  should  cease, 
and  military  occupation  be  changed  into  polit 
ical  occupation.  Elphinstone  v.  Bedruchund,  1 
Knapp"1  s  Rep.,  p.  338;  Cross  v.  Harrison,  16  How., 
p.  164. 

If  we  now  return,  and  endeavor  to  glean  from 
all  these  authorities  and  opinions  an  idea  of 
martial  law,  as  applicable  to  the  internal  affairs 
of  a  State,  we  shall  find  ourselves  scarcely 
nearer  to  it  than  we  were  at  the  start.  The 
laivs  of  war  regulate  a  state  of  war,  and  define 
the  rights  of  parties  to  it,  with  respect  to  each 
other;  and  can  only  afford,  therefore,  a  remote 
analogy  for  our  guidance  in  the  internal  con 
cerns  of  a  State  in  which  riots  or  rebellions 
call  into  requisition  the  military  power.  True, 


when  a  civil  war  assumes  the  magnitude  of 
our  present  contest,  and  the  parties  thereto — 
rebels  on  the  one  side  and  Government  on  the 
other — from  the  necessity  of  the  case,  as  well 
as  from  considerations  of  humanity,  are  com 
pelled  to  adopt  the  public  law  of  war,  and  to 
regulate  their  conduct  according  to  its  princi 
ples,  the  laws  of  war  become,  to  that  extent, 
a  sufficient  guide.  But  all  this  does  not,  in 
the  least,  help  us,  in  regard  to  those  States 
which  have  never  been  engaged  against  the 
Government.  Whether  any,  and  if  any,  what 
assertion  of  military  power,  incompatible  with 
civil  institutions  and  civil  rights,  is  admissi 
ble  in  those  States,  does  not  appear  from  the 
books  that  treat  of  martial  law.  Earl  Gi-ey 
seems  to  approach  the  point  more  nearly  than 
the  rest ;  for  in  such  case  martial  law  would 
"in  truth  and  fact  be  no  law  at  all;  but  the  setting 
aside  of  all  law  and  acting  under  military  power. 
Supra.  And  this,  he  says,  can  only  be  done 
"in  circumstances  of  great  emergency,"  and 
must  be  followed  "by  an  act  of  indemnity." 
It  is,  therefore,  the  substitution  of  military 
force  for,  arid  to  the  exclusion  of,  the  laws; 
and  can  be  justified  no  further  than  is  abso 
lutely  necessary.  And  all  the  authorities 
and  opinions  cited  go  to  this  extent,  and  no 
further. 

Has  this  substitution,  then,  of  military  power 
for  civil  law,  and  civil  tribunals  and  institu 
tions,  taken  place  in  Indiana?  And  if  so, 
upon  what  necessity?  When  was  it  done? 
Who  determined  the  necessity,  and  made  the 
substitution?  Where  is  the  act  of  Congress, 
the  proclamation  of  the  President,  or  the  order 
of  the  military  commander  of  the  department, 
or  the  district?  Have  these,  or  has  any  of 
them,  acted  upon  this  subject;  and,  if  so,  to 
what  extent?  And  above,  and  before  all, 
where  is  the  grant  of  authority  to  any,  or  all 
of  them  combined,  or,  indeed,  to  the  whole 
Government,  thus  to  "set  aside  all  law,"  and 
substitute  "military  power"  therefor?  To 
assume  that  any  such  authority  can  exist  in  a 
limited  government,  is  a  self-contradiction. 

Let  us  examine,  briefly,  the  nature  of  the 
Vnglican  system  of  civil  liberty — institutional 
government — a  system  which,  in  a  very  large 
measure,  we  have  inherited  or  adopted;  and 
see  whether  such  a  system  as  martial  law  is  at 
all  compatible  therewith.  Can  the  two  exist 
together? 

I  shall  endeavor  to  answer  this  question  by 
a  brief  review  of  English  history  and  law; 
for  if  this  power  "to  set  aside  all  law,"  and 
to  "act  under  military  power,"  be  at  all  con 
sistent  with  such  a  system  of  law  and  govern 
ment,  we  shall  thus  be  able  to  determine  in 
what  emergencies  and  to  what  extent. 

I  enter  the  more  cheerfully  upon  this  re 
view,  because  it  will  enable  me  to  correct  my 
friend,  the  Judge  Advocate,  in  an  assertion 
which  he  has  frequently  made  during  th" 
progress  of  these  trials,  namely:  "  We  art 
maldng  new  precedents  daily."  Now.  I  think,  I 
shall  be  able  to  show  him  that  we  are  follow 
ing  old  and  bad  precedents — the  work  of 
wicked  and  lawless  princes  in  evil  times — 
which  were  condemned,  disallowed,  and  re 
versed  by  better  princes  immediately  upon 


204 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


the  return  of  better  times;  and  which  an 
only  not  known  to  him,  because  they  have  s< 
long  remained  dead  and  buried  among  th< 
rubbish  of  barbarous  ages,  that  he  has  no 
been  able,  or,  at  least,  has  not  chosen  to  dig 
them  up  for  his  own  and  your  guidance  on 
this  occasion.  I  shall  aid  him  in  this  respect 
and,  while  I  do  so,  must  beg  his  pardon,  anc 
that  of  the  Government  he  represents,  for  dis 
pelting  the  illusion  that  either  is  entitled  to 
patent  a  new  precedent.  In  this  regard  they 
will  find,  after  all,  and,  indeed,  they  should 
have  known  from  the  first,  that  the  further 
back  they  go  in  the  history  of  the  past,  the  more 
precedents  they  will  find  for  the  easy  but 
ruinous  substitution  of  force  for  law.  Wher 
ever  a  free  people  have  lost  their  liberties, 
there  will  be  found  a  precedent  in  point.  The 
history  of  Greece  and  Rome  is  fruitful  of  such 
precedents.  Solomon  had  wiser  conceptions 
of  the  methods  by  which  history  continually 
repeats  itself,  than  to  speak  of  new  prece 
dents;  and  the  sum  of  wisdom  on  this  point, 
as  in  his  day,  still  remains  happily  expressed 
in  these  words:  "There  is  no  new  thing  un 
der  the  sun." 

I  will  not  go  back  in  the  history  of  English 
law  beyond  Magna  Charta;  for  that  "solemn 
instrument"  has  been  justly  regarded  as  lay 
ing  the  imperishable  foundations  of  the  great 
political  institutions  of  that  country.  Creasy 
on  the  English  Constitution,  3.  Ours,  in  America, 
rest  on  the  same  foundations — are  referable  to 
the  same  origin. 

The  29th  chapter  of  that  instrument,  as  given 
by  Henry  III,  contains  these  provisions,  which 
have  found  a  place  in  all  our  American  Con 
stitutions: 

"Nullus  liber  homo  capiatur,  vel  imprisonetur, 
aut  disseisietur  de  libero  tenemento  suo,  vel  liberta- 
tibus,  vel  liberis  consuetudinibus  suis,  aut  utlagatur, 
aut  exuletur,  aut  aliquo  modo  distruatur,  nee  super 
cum  ibimus,  nee  super  eum  mittimus,  nisi  per  legale 
judicium  parium  suorum,  vel  per  legem  terras."  2 
Coke's  Inst.,  p.  45.  Which  has  been  rendered 
as  follows: 

"No  freeman  shall  be  taken,  or  imprisoned, 
or  disseized,  or  outlawed,  or  exiled  or  ban 
ished,  or  in  any  ways  destroyed;  nor  will  we 
pass  upon  him,  nor  will  we  send  upon  him, 
unless  by  the  lawful  judgment  of  his  peers, 
or  by  the  law  of  the  land."  Creasy,  supra, 
p.  134. 

"These  are,"  as  Mr.  Creasy  observes,  "all 
words  that  should  be  carefully  read  over,  and 
over,  and  again;  for,  as  Lord  Coke  quaintly 
observes,  in  his  comments  on  them,  'as  the 
gold-finer  will  not,  out  of  the  dust,  threds,  or 
shreds  of  gold,  let  passe  the  least  crum,'  in 
respect  of  the  excellency  of  the  metal;  so 
ought  not  the  learned  reader  to  passe  any 
syllable  of  this  law,  in  respect  of  the  excel 
lency  of  the  matter.'  "  Id.,  135;  and  2  Inst.,  57. 

Lord  Coke  in  commenting  upon  the  words: 
"No  man  destroyed,"  etc.,  gives  the  following 
commentary  and  illustration: 

"That  is,  forejudged  of  life,  or  limb,  dis- 
herited,  or  put  to  torture  or  death."  *  *  * 

"  Thomas,  Earl  of  Lancaster,  was  destroyed, 
that  is,  adjudged  to  die  as  a  traitor,  and  put 
to  death,  in  14  E.  2,  and  a  record  thereof 


made;  and  Henry,  Earl  of  Lancaster,  his 
brother  and  heir,  was  restored  for  two  prin 
cipal  errors  against?  the  same  Thomas,  Earl :  1. 
Quod  non  fuit  araniatus,  et  ad  responsionem  posi- 
tus  tempore  pads,  eo  quod  cancellaria  et  alice  curias 
Regis  fuer,  aperice,  in  quibus  lex  fiebat  unicuique 
prout  fieri  consuevit :  that  is  to  say :  Because 
he  was  not  arraigned,  and  because  in  time 
of  peace,  he  was  put  to  trial  while  the 
Chancery  and  other  courts  of  the  King  were 
open,  in  each  of  which  the  law  was  regularly 
administered:  2.  Quod  contra  cartam  de  liber- 
tatibus,  cum  dictum  Thomas  fuit  unus  parium  et 
magnatum  regni,  in  qua  continelur — and  recheth 
this  chapter  of  Magna  Charta,  and  specially 
quod  Dominus  Lex  non  super  eum  ibit ;  nee  mittet ; 
nisi  per  legale  judicium  parium  suorum,  contra 

em,  et  contra  tenorum  Magna  Charta;  that  is, 
because  it  was  against  the  charter  of  liber 
ties,  since  the  said  Thomas  was  one  of  the 
peers  and  magnates  of  the  realm  in  which  it  is 
preserved ;  and  reciteth  this  chapter  of  Magna 
Charta,  and  specially  'because  the  Lord  the 
King  will  not  proceed  against  anyone,  nor  send 
upon  him,  unless  by  the  legal  judgment  of  his 
peers.  Nevertheless,  by  the  aforesaid  proceed 
ing,  in  time  of  peace,  without  arraignment, 
or  pleading,  or  the  legal  judgment  of  his 
peers,  against  law,  and  the  terms  of  Magna 
Charta,  he  was  put  to  death.  More  examples 
of  this  kind  might  be  found."  Id.,  supra. 

This  case,  when  the  mode  of  trial  is  shown, 
is  the  reversal  of  a  precedent  which  the  Judge 
Advocate  would,  perhaps,  style  "a  new  pre 
cedent  ;  "  for  the  historian  tells  us  that  Thomas 
of  Lancaster  was  adjudged  to  death  by  a  kind 
of  military  court,  extemporized  by  the  King, 
and  consisting  of  himself  and  a  few  Earls  and 
Barons.  2  Lingard  His.  Eng.,  p.  248,  and  note; 
2  Hume  His.  of  Eng.,  pp.  159,  160. 

The  learned  Coke  adds,  immediately  after 
citing  this  case,  and  its  reversal: 

'Every  oppression  against  law,  by  color  of 
any  usurped  authority,  is  a  kind  of  destruc 
tion  ;  for  Quando  aliquid  prohibitur,  prohibiter  et 
omne,  per  quod  devenitur  ad  illud:  and  it  is  the 
most  grievous  oppression  that  is  done  by  color 
of  justice."  Id.,  sup. 

The  reversal  of  a  second  precedent  that 
might  be  regarded  as  new,  is  recited  by  Sir 
Vlatthew  Hale  in  his  History  of  the  Common 
Law;  and  is  thus  given: 

'The  exercfte  of  martial  law,  whereby   any 
aerson  should  lose  his  life,  or  member,  or  lib 
erty,  may   not  be  permitted  in  time  of  peace, 
when  the  King's  Courts  are  open  for  all  per 
sons  to  receive  justice  according  to  the  laws 
f  the  land.     This  is,  in  substance,  declared 
>y  the  Petition  of  Right,  3  Car.  1,  whereby  such 
commissions  and  martial  law  were  repealed  and 
leclared  contrary  to  law.     And  accordingly 
was   that  famous    case  of   Edmund,  Earl    of 
£ent,  who  being  taken  at  Pomfret,  15  Edw.  2, 
he  King  and  divers  lords  proceeded  to  give 
entence  of  death  against  him,  as  in  a  kind 
if  military  court,  by  a  summary  proceeding, 
which  judgment  was  afterward,   in  1  Edw.  3, 
reversed  in  Parliament.     And  the  reason  of 
hat  reversal  serving  to  the  purpose  in   hand, 
shall  here  insert  it  as  entered  in  the  record, 
viz.:     '  Quod   cum    quicunq;  homo    ligcus   domini 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


205 


regis  pro  seditionibus,  etc.,  tempore  pads  captus  et 
in  quacunquc  curia  domini  regis  ductus  fuerit  de 
fjusmodi  seditionibus  et  aliis  feloniis  sibi  impositis 
per  Iff/cm  et  consuetudine  rcgni  arrectari  debet  et 
responsionem  adduci,  et  inde  per  communem  legem 
anteqiiam  fuerit  morti  adjudicantV  (triari)  etc-. 
Undc  mm  notorium  sit  et  manifestum  quod  totum 
tcmpus  quo  impositum  fuit  eidem  comiti  propter 
mala  e t  facinora  fecisse,  ad  tempus  in  quo  captus 
fait  et  in  quo  morti  adjudicalus  fuit,  fuit  tempus 
P'.icis  maxima?,  cum  per  totum  tcmpus  prcedictum  et 
cancel/aria  et  alice  plac.  curice  domini  regis  apertce 
flier,  in  quibus  cuilibet  lex  fiebatur  sicut  fieri  con- 
fiievit,  nee  idem  dominis  rex  unquam  tempore  illo 
cum  vexillis  explicatis  equitabat,  etc.'1  Which 
record  may  be  rendered  thus: 

"  Whenever  the  subject  of  the  Lord  the  King, 
shall  be  arrested  for  sedition  in  time  of  peace, 
before  he  can  be  adjudged  to  death,  according 
to  the  common  law.  he  must  be  taken  into 
some  court,  of  the  King,  and  held  to  answer 
for  such  seditions  and  other  felonies;  whence 
it  follows,  that  when  it  is  made  known  and 
manifest,  that  all  the  time  during  which  it  is 
alleged  that  the  crimes  were  done,  on  account 
of  which  he  was  arrested,  to  the  time  in  which 
he  was*  taken  and  adjudged  to  death,  was  a 
time  of  profound  peace,  and  during  all  the 
time  aforesaid,  the  Chancery  and  other  courts 
of  the  King  were  open,  in  which  any  law 
could  be  executed,  as  it  was  the  custom  to  have 
done,  the  same  Lord  the  King  had  no  power, 
during  that  time,  to  exercise  military  control. 

"And,  accordingly,  the  judgment  was  re 
versed;  for  martial  law,  which  is  rather  in 
dulged  than  allowed,  and  that  only  in  case  of 
necessity,  in  time  of  open  war,  is  not  permitted 
iit-timc  of  peace  when  the  ordinary  courts  of  justice 
are  open"  1  His.  C.  L.,  pp.  55,  56. 

In  order  that  these  precedents  may  have 
their  due  weight  in  this  case,  I  beg  leave  to 
give  a  legal  definition  of  what  is,  in  this 
respect,  held  to  be  a  time  of  peace  in  England, 
according  to  the  common  law.  I  will  quote 
the  precise  language  of  Lord  Coke,  who  says: 

"  When  the  courts  of  Justice  are  open,  and  the 
judges  and  ministers  of  the  same  may  by 
law  protect  men  from  oppression  and  vio 
lence,  and  distribute  justice  to  all,  it  is  said 
to  be  a  time  of  peace.  So,  when  by  invasion,  in 
surrection,  or  rebellion,  etc.,  the  peaceable 
course  of  justice  is  stopped,  so  as  the  courts  of  jus 
tice  be  as  it  were  shut  up,  then  it  is  said  to  be 
time  of  war.:'  Coke  upon  Littleton,  249,  b.  n.  1. 

In  further  commenting  upon  the  great  chap 
ter  of  Magna  Charta,  already  quoted,  Lord 
Coke  says: 

'"By  the  judgment  of  his  peers'  are  to  be 
understood  of  the  King's  suit" — in  other 
words,  of  a  State  prosecution.  "And  it  ex- 
teudeth  to  the  King's  suit  in  case  of  treason 
or  felony,  or  misprision  of  treason  or  felony,  I 
or  being  accessory  to  a  felony  before  or  after, 
and  not  to  any  other  inferior  offense.  Also, 
it  extendeth  to  the  trial  where  he  is  to  be  con 
victed."  2  Inst.,  49. 

And  upon  the  word  "legale,"  he  says: 

"By  the  word  legate,  amongst  others,  three 
things  are  implied:  1st.  That  the  manner  of 
trial  was  by  law  before  this  statute.  2d.  That 
their  verdict  must  be  legally  given,  wherein 


principally  it  is  to  be  observed,  1st.  That  the 
lords  ought  to  hear  no  evidence  but  in  the 
presence  and  hearing  of  the  prisoner;  2d. 
After  the  lords  have  gone  together  to  consider 
of  the  evidence,  they  can  not  send  to  the  High 
Steward  to  ask  the  judges  any  question  of 
law,  but  in  the  hearing  of  the  prisoner,  etc.; 
3d.  When  all  the  evidence  is  given,  etc.,  the 
High  Steward  can  not  collect  the  evidence 
against  the  prisoner,  or  in  any  sort  confer 
with  Mie  lords,  touching  their  evidence,  in  the 
absence  of  the  prisoner,"  etc.  2  Inst.,  49. 

And  again,  upon  the  word,  "by  the  law  of 
the  land,"  while,  perhaps,  going  to  the  extent 
of  permitting  a  party  suspected  of  treason  to 
be  arrested  without  writ,  upon  suspicion  and 
common  fame,  he  totally  excludes  the  notion 
of  his  continued  imprisonment  without  some 
warrant;  and  leaves  out  of  the  question  all 
other  forms  of  trial,  but  that  by  the  legal 
judgment  of  his  peers.  Id.,  pp.  50,  55. 

After  the  close  of  the  long  and  glorious 
reign  of  Edward  the  Third,  his  unworthy 
grandson,  Richard  the  Second,  came  to  the 
throne,  which  he  finally  lost,  by  attempting  to 
return  to  such  precedents  as  those  just  cited 
of  his  great  grandfather.  His  eiforts  to  get 
rid  of  Magna  Charta  and  the  Common  Law, 
and  to  substitute  the  Roman  Civil  Law  for 
them,  may  be  learned  from  the  records  of  his 
reign.  An  outline  sufficient  for  our  purpose 
will  be  found  in  Sullivan  s  Lectures  on  the  Laws 
and  Constitution  of  England.  (See  vol.  1,  p.  318, 
et  scq.;  and  vol.  2,  257.)  In  the  former  place 
will  be  seen  what  great  efforts  lie  made  to  in 
troduce  the  Civil  Law,  and  in  the  latter,  that 
this  law  became  the  law  of  the  Marshal's 
Court;  no  doubt  on  account  of  the  fondness 
of  the  kings  therefor,  and,  also,  that  the  ju 
risdiction  of  that  court  embraced  the  admin 
istration  of  martial  law  over  soldiers  and  camp 
followers. 

In  subsequent  reigns,  the  kings  of  England 
struggled  almost  constantly  to  extend  this 
jurisdiction  to  others  than  soldiers;  but  it 
was  a  struggle  against  the  free  spirit  of  the 
nation.  In  the  reign  of  Henry  the  Eighth,  an 
instrument  was  placed  in  the  hands  of  that 
monarch,  by  the  Parliament,  which  seemed  to 
go  far  toward  making  the  king  absolute;  and 
which  was  subsequently  used  by  him  and  his 
successors  in  such  a  way  as  almost  to  insure 
that  end.  This  was  done  by  the  passage  of  a 
statute  "which,"  as  Lord  Coke  observes,  "  gives 
more  power  to  the  king  than  ho  had  before;" 
and  yet  even  there  it  is  declared  that  he  can 
not  "  alter  the  law,  statutes  or  customs  of  the 
realm,  or  impeach  any  in  his  inheritance, 
goods,  body,  life,  etc."  The  father  of  that 
King  had  gone  so  far,  prior  to  this  act,  as  to 
claim  the  right  to  control  the  subject's  right 
of  doing  all  things  not  unlawful  (Italian's 
Constitutional  History,^.  15);  and  his  daughter, 
Queen  Elizabeth,  carried  the  power  under  this 
act  to  such  an  extent  as  to  set  all  law  at  defi 
ance.  '•  One  Peter  Burchill,  a  fanatical  Puri 
tan,  and,  perhaps,  insane,  conceiving  that  Sir 
Christopher  Hatton  was  an  enemy  to  the  true 
religion,  determined  to  assassinate  him;  but, 
by  mistake,  he  wounded  instead  a  famous  sea 
man,  Captain  Hawkins.  For  this  ordinary 


206 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


crime,  the  Queen  could  hardly  be  prevented 
from  directing  him  to  be  tried  instantly  by 
martial  law.  Her  council,  however,  (and  this 
it  is  important  to  observe),  resisted  this  ille 
gal  proposition  with  spirit  and  success." 
(Hallam  Cons.  His.,  143.)  "The  Queen  had  been 
told,  it  seems,  of  what  had  been  done  in 
Wyatt's  business — a  case  not  at  all  parallel; 
though  there  was  no  sufficient  necessity,  even 
in  that  instance,  to  justify  the  proceeding  bjr 
martial  law.  But  bad  precedents  always  be 
get  progenium  vitiosiorem."  (Id.,  in  note). 
But  the  same  learned  authority  gives  the 
following  instances  of  the  exercise  by  Queen 
Elizabeth  of  a  power  almost  absolute,  through 
proclamations.  I  quote: 

"  \Ve  have,  indeed,  a  proclamation  some 
years  afterward,  declaring  that  such  as 
brought  into  the  kingdom,  dispersed  papal 
bulls,  or  traitorous  libels  against  the  Queen, 
should,  with  all  severity,  be  proceeded  against 
by  Her  Majesty's  lieutenants,  or  their  depu 
ties,  by  martial  law,  and  suffer  such  pains  and 
penalties  as  they  should  inflict;  and  that  none 
of  her  said  lieutenants,  or  their  deputies,  be 
in  any  wise  impeached  in  body,  lands,  or 
goods,  at  any  time  hereafter,  for  any  thing  to 
be  done  or  executed  in  the  punishment  of  any 
such  offender,  according  to  the  said  martial  law 
and  the  tenor  of  this  proclamation,  any  law 
or  statute  to  the  contrary,  notwithstanding.'' 
This  Mr.  Hallara  regards  as  "by  no  means  con 
stitutional;  "  but  apologises  for  it,  because  it 
was  done  "when,  within  a  few  days,  the  vast 
armament  of  Spain  " — known  in  history  as 
the  Spanish  Armada — "  might  effect  a  landing 
on  the  coast."  "But,"  he  remarks  further, 
"it  is  an  unhappy  consequence  of  all  devia 
tions  from  the  even  course  of  law,  that  the 
forced  acts  of  overruling  necessity  come  to  be 
distorted  into  precedents,  to  serve  the  pur 
poses  of  arbitrary  power."  Id.,  143;  Hume's 
His.  Eng.,  p.  344. 

I  quote  the  same  author  for  the  following 
instance  of  a  still  greater  stretch  of  this  ar 
bitrary  and  unconstitutional  power,  which  oc 
curred  during  the  same  reign: 

"No  measure  of  Elizabeth's  reign  can  be 
compared,  in  point  of  illegality,  to  a  commis 
sion  in  July,  1595,  directed  to  Sir  Thomas 
Wilford,  whereby,  upon  no  other  allegation 
than  that  there  had  been  of  late  sundry  great 
unlawful  assemblies  of  a  riotous  sort,  both  in 
the  city  of  London  and  the  suburbs,  for  the 
suppression  whereof  (for  the  insolency  of 
many  desperate  offenders  is  such  that 'they 
care  not  for  any  ordinary  punishment)  it  was 
found  necessary  to  have  some  such  notable  re 
bellious  persons  to  be  speedily  suppressed  by 
execution  to  death,  according  to  the  justice  of 
martial  law  ;  he  is  appointed  provost,  marshal 
with  authority  by  the  magistrates,  to  attack 
and  seize  such  notable,  rebellious  and  incor 
rigible  offenders,  and  in  the  presence  of  the 
magistrate  to  execute  them  openly,  on  the 
gallows."  *  *  * 

"This  peremptory  style  of  suspending  the 
Common  Law  was  a  stretch  of  prerogative 
without  an  adequate  parallel,  so  far  as  I  know, 
in  any  former  period."  Id.,  143,  144;  4  Humes 
His.  Eng.,  p.  344. 


It  must  be  remembered  that  these  high-handed 
measures  took  place  in  the  sixteenth  century, 
a  period  when  both  religious  and  political 
revolutions  were  rife  in  Europe;  that  the  life 
of  Elizabeth  was  more  than  once  the  object  of 
conspiracies,  both  foreign  and  domestic;  that 
the  ablest  men  in  Europe  were  parties  to  and 
prompters  in  these  perfidious  and  bloody 
schemes  (Motley's  Dutch  Republic,  vol.  2,  part  3, 
p.  333;  and  D' Israeli's  Curiosities  of  Literature, 
1st.  ser.,  p.  1GG);  that  the  very  persons  at 
whom  these  proclamations  were  aimed,  had,  in 
the  preceding  reign  of  her  sister,  employed  the 
same  agencies  for  the  overthrow  of  her  religion 
in  the  kingdom,  and  the  destruction  of  her 
friends;  that  the  constable's  and  marshal's 
court,  "whose  jurisdiction  was  considered  as 
of  a  military  nature,"  and  whose  proceedings 
were  not  according  to  the  course  of  the  com 
mon  law,  had  "sometimes  tried  offenders" — 
not  soldiers — by  what  was  called  martial  law, 
"either  during  or  not  long  after  a  serious  re 
bellion;  "  and,  above  all,  that,  at  the  time  of  the 
last-mentioned  proclamation,  the  queen  was  a 
very  old  woman,  and,  it  may  be,  somewhat 
subject  to  fits  of  ill  temper.  All  these  things 
must,  be  reckoned  in  her  favor,  to  mitigate  the 
judgment  of  history  against  these  arbitrary 
measures;  but  still  can  not  save  the  acts  them 
selves  from  the  indignant  condemnation  of 
mankind.  Accordingly,  we  find  Lord  Coke, 
in  the  next  reign,  condemning  utterly  the  doc 
trine  that  the  king's  proclamation  can  either 
alter,  repeal,  or  suspend  the  law,  or  make  that 
criminal  which  before  was  not.  He  says: 

"The  King  can  not  create  any  offense  by  his 
prohibition  or  pi'oclamation,  which  was  not  an 
offense  before;  for  that  was  to  change  the  law, 
and  to  make  an  offense  which  was  not;  for  ubi 
non  est  lex,  ibi  non  est  transyressio:  therefore  that 
which  can  not  be  punished  without  proqlama- 
tion.  can  not  be  punished  with  it."  "But,"  he 
further  remarks,  "we  do  find  divers  precedents 
of  proclamations  which  are  utterly  against 
law  and  reason,  and  for  that  void;  quoe  contra 
rationem  juris  introducta  sunt,  non  debent  trahi  in 
consequentiam  " — i.  e.,  measures  introduced  con 
trary  to  the  reason  of  the  law,  ought  not  to  be 
drawn  into  consequence,  or  precedent.  Again, 
he  says  that  it  had  been  held  that  the  king,  by 
his  proclamation,  can  not  create  any  offense 
which  was  not  an  offense  before,  "for  then  he 
may  alter  the  law  of  the  land  by  his  procla 
mation,  in  a  high  point;  for,  if  he  may  create 
an  offense  where  none  is,  upon  that  ensues  fine 
and  imprisonment.  Also,  the  law  of  England 
is  divided  into  three  parts — common  law, 
statute  law,  and  custom;  but  the  King's  procla 
mation  is  none  of  them.  Also,  malum  aut  est 
malum  inse,  aut  prohibitum,  that  which  is  against 
common  law  is  malum  in  se,  malum  prohibitum  is 
such  an  offense  as  is  prohibited  by  act  of  Par 
liament,  and  not  by  proclamation."  12  Rep.) 
pp.  74,  75,  76. 

Yet,  notwithstanding  the  law  was  thus  co 
gently  laid  down  in  the  time  of  James  the 
First,  we,  nevertheless,  find  Charles  the  First, 
in  the  first  year  of  his  reign,  endeavoring  to 
return  to  the  bad  and  unlawful  measures  of 
his  predecessors.  He  accordingly  addressed  a 
commission  to  Lord  Wimbleton,  28th  Decem- 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


207 


ber,  1625,  empowering  "him  to  proceed  against 
soldiers,  or  dissolute  persons  joining  with 
them,  who  should  commit  any  robberies,  etc., 
which,  by  martial  law,  ought  to  be  punished 
with  death,  by  such  summai'y  course  as  is 
agreeable  to  martial  laiv."  He,  also,  issued 
another  commission  of  the  same  kind,  in  1626. 
See  llallam's  Const.  His.,  p.  223,  and  note. 

These  unlawful  proclamations,  among  other 
grievances,  subsequently  moved  Parliament  to 
demand  of  His  Majesty  the  justly  celebrated 
Petition  of  Right,  which  forever  put  an  end  to 
all  colorable  pretenses  of  their  legality.  Let 
it  be  observed,  too,  that  this  great  act  is  but 
declaratory  of  the  common  law.  No  measure 
was  ever  supported  on  the  side  of  the  Parlia 
ment  with  greater  force  of  talents  and  learn 
ing;  or  opposed  by  the  King  with  worse  show 
of  reason,  or  more  barefaced  attempts  to  de 
ceive  the  public,  and  to  prevent  its  final  pas 
sage.  Among  the  managers  of  the  Commons, 
on  that  occasion,  may  be  reckoned  the  great 
names  of  Coke  and  Selden — two  names  that 
may,  perhaps,  be  equaled,  but  certainly  not 
surpassed,  for  learning  and  ability,  in  English 
history.  Under  their  management,  the  measure 
was  finally  perfected  and  passed;  and  became 
a  new  guaranty  of  Anglican  liberty.  I  shall 
make  no  apology  for  reading  here  such  parts 
of  it  as  I  deem  pertinent  to  the  subject  under 
consideration.  They  are  as  follows: 

"And  whereas,  also,  by  the  statute  called 
the  Great  Charter  of  the  Liberties  of  England, 
it  is  declared  and  enacted,  that  no  freeman 
may  be  taken  or  imprisoned,  or  be  disseized 
of  his  freehold  or  liberties,  or  his  free  customs, 
or  be  outlawed,  or  exiled,  or  in  any  manner 
destroyed,  but  by  the  lawful  judgment  of  his 
peers,  or  by  the  law  of  the  land. 

"And  in  the  eight  and  twentieth  year  of  the 
reign  of  King  Edward  III,  it  was  declared  and 
enacted  by  authority  of  Parliament,  that  no 
man,  of  what  estate  or  condition  that  he  be, 
should  be  put  out  of  his  lands  or  tenements, 
nor  taken,  nor  imprisoned,  nor  disherited,  nor 
put  to  death,  without  being  brought  to  answer 
by  due  process  of  law.  *  *  * 

"And  whereas,  also,  by  authority  of  Parlia 
ment  in  the  five  and  twentieth  year  of  the 
reign  of  King  Edward  III,  it  was  declared  and 
enacted,  that  no  man  should  be  forejudged  of 
life  or  limb  against  the  form  of  the  Great 
Charter  and  the  law  of  the  land;  and  by  the 
said  Great  Charter,  and  other,  the  laws  and 
statutes  of  this  your  realm,  no  man  ought  to 
be  adjudged  to  death  but  by  the  laws  estab 
lished  in  this  your  realm,  either  by  the 
customs  of  the  same  realm,  or  by  acts  of  Par 
liament:  and  whereas,  no  offender  of  what 
kind  soever,  is  exempted  from  the  proceedings 
to  be  used,  and  punishments  to  be  inflicted  by 
the  laws  and  statutes  of  this  your  realm: 
nevertheless,  of  late  time,  divers  commissions 
under  your  Majesty's  great  seal  have  issued 
forth,  by  which  certain  persons  have  been 
assigned,  and  appointed  commissioners  with 
power  and  authority  to  proceed  within  the 
land  according  to  the  justice  of  martial  law 
against  such  soldiers,  or  mariners,  or  other 
dissolute  persons  joining  with  them,  as  should 
commit  any  murder,  robbery,  felony,  mutiny, 


or  other  outrage  or  misdemeanor  whatsoever; 
and  by  such  summary  course  and  order  as  is 
agreeable  to  martial  law,  and  as  is  used  in 
armies  in  time  of  war,  to  proceed  to  the  trial 
and  condemnation  of  such  offenders,  and  them 
to  cause  to  be  executed  and  put  to  death  ac 
cording  to  the  law  martial. 

"By  pretext  whereof  some  of  your  Majesty's 
subjects  have  been  by  some  of  said  commis 
sioners  put  to  death,  when  and  where,  if  by 
the  laws  and  statutes  of  the  land  they  had 
deserved  death,  by  the  same  laws  and  statutes 
also,  they  might,  and  by  no  other  ought,  to  have 
been  judged  and' executed. 

"They  do,  therefore,  humbly  pray  your  Most 
Excellent  Majesty  *  *  *  that  the  afore 
said  commissions  for  proceeding  by  martial 
law,  may  be  revoked  and  annulled;  and  that 
hereafter  no  commissions  of  the  like  nature 
may  issue  forth  to  any  person  or  persona 
whatsoever  to  be  executed  as  aforesaid,  lest 
by  colour  of  them  any  of  your  Majesty's  sub 
jects  be  destroyed,  or  put  to  death  contrary  to 
the  laws  and  franchises  of  the  land." 

And  to  this  prayer  the  King  was  finally 
compelled  to  answer,  "Soitfait  comme  est  desire — 
be  it  as  it  is  desired."  2  Parl.  His.,  p.  374,  et 
seq.;  and  Creasy  on  the  Eng.  Const.,  pp.  260-264. 

But  this  act  was  no  sooner  passed  than  the 
perfidious  King  set  about  violating  its  provi 
sions;  whereby  he  finally  drove  his  Parliament 
and  the  people  into  open  rebellion  against  him. 
In  the  contest  which  ensued  they  beat  him,  took 
him,  and  beheaded  him,  by  the  judgment  of  a 
tribunal  not  better  in  point  of  constitution 
ality  than  those  by  which  he  had  doomed 
many  of  his  subjects  to  death.  The  engineer 
was  thus  literally  "hoist  with  his  own  petard." 
"The  curse,"  which  he  had  more  than  once 
sent  abroad  over  his  kingdom,  thus,  at  last, 
"came  home  to  roost." 

It  is  necessary  for  our  purpose  to  notice  in 
detail  the  measures  of  the  next  two  reigns. 
Let  it  suffice  for  the  present  to  say  that  in  the 
31  Car.  2,  "the  justly  celebrated  habeas  corpus 
act  was  passed,  and  the  personal  liberty  of  the 
subject  thereby  more  effectually  guaranteed 
than  ever  before;  and  that  for  attempting  to 
procure  its  repeal,  dispense  with  acts  of  Par 
liament,  by  commissions  or  otherwise,  and 
other  similar  illegal  measures,  his  brother, 
James  the  Second,  was  obliged  to  abdicate, 
and  fly  the  kingdom,  and  William  and  Mary 
were  called  to  the  throne.  1  Macaulay's  His. 
Eng.,  p.  186;  2  Id.,  3;  Id.,  62,  64. 

Upon  the  accession  of  William  and  Mary, 
the  great  principles  of  Anglican  liberty  were 
again  distinctly  asserted  in  the  Bill  of  Rights; 
and  all  the  guarantees  thereof  reaffirmed. 
Creasy  on  the  English  Constitution,  p.  284,  et  seq. 
Since  that  event  there  has  been  no  trial  of 
any  citizen  by  martial  law  in  Gi-eat  Britain. 
The  writ  of  habeas  corpus  has  been  suspended 
often;  and  in  two  instances,  arising  from  both 
rebellion  and  invasion,  martial  law  has  been 
proclaimed;  but  it  has  never  been  carried 
further  than  to  the  arrest  and  imprisonment 
of  suspected  persons,  until  trial  by  the  ordi 
nary  tribunals  could  be  had.  One  would  think, 
too,  from*  a  perusal  of  the  State  Trials  which 
followed  these  invasions  and  rebellions,  that 


208 


TKEASON   TRIALS   AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


the  punishments  inflicted  were  "both  certain 
and  sanguinary  enough  to  satisfy  all  the  ends 
of  State  justice.  It  will  be  understood,  of 
course,  that  I  speak  of  the  invasions  of  the 
Pretender  in  1715,  and  again  in  1745.  But 
that  I  am  not  mistaken  in  regard  to  the  fact, 
that  martial  law  was  not,  in  either  instance, 
enforced  to  the  trial  and  punishment  of  any 
citizen,  and  has  not  been  in  any  other  instance 
since  or  before,  subsequent  to  the  abdication 
of  James  the  Second,  I  beg  leave  to  show  by 
reference  to  the  case  of  Grant  v.  Gould,  2  Hy. 
El.  Rep.,  89;  and  the  following  passage  from 
DeLolme's  excellent  treatise  on  the  Constitu 
tion  : 

"  At  the  time  of  the  invasions  of  the  Pre 
tender,  assisted  by  the  forces  of  hostile  nations, 
the  habeas  corpus  act  was,  indeed,  suspended 
(which,  by  the  by,  may  serve  as  one  proof, 
that  in  proportion  as  a  government  is  in  dan 
ger,  it  becomes  necessary  to  abridge  the  lib 
erty  of  the  subject),  but  the  Executive  power 
did  not  thus  of  itself  stretch  its  own  authority.  The 
precaution  was  deliberated  upon  and  taken 
by  the  representatives  of  the  people ;  and  the 
detaining  of  individuals  in  consequence  of 
the  suspension  of  the  act,  was  limited  to  a 
certain  fixed  time.  Notwithstanding  the  just 
fears  of  internal  and  hidden  enemies,  which 
the  circumstances  of  the  times  might  raise, 
the  deviation  from  the  former  course  of  law 
was  carried  no  further  than  the  single  point 
we  have  mentioned.  Persons  detained  by 
order  of  the  Government  were  to  be  dealt  with 
in  the  same  manner  as  those  arrested  at  the 
suit  of  private  individuals;  the  proceedings 
against  them  were  to  be  carried  on  no  other 
wise  than  in  a  public  place;  they  were  to  be 
tried  by  their  peers;  and  have  all  the  usual 
legal  means  of  defense  allowed  them — such  as 
the  calling  of  witnesses,  peremptory  chal 
lenges  of  jurors,"  etc.  DeLolme  on  the  Const., 
by  Macgregor,  p.  274. 

It  has  been  supposed  by  many  that  martial 
law  was  proclaimed  in  England,  in  1780, 
during  the  great  Protestant  riot,  headed  in  its 
incipiency  by  the  celebrated  Lord  George 
Gordon.  It  is  a  mistake,  however,  due,  per 
haps,  to  the  discussions  in  Parliament  soon 
after  that  event,  in  relation  to  the  King's 
ordering  the  military  to  suppress  the  riot, 
and  which  was  done  by  direct  military  force. 
It  was  supposed,  then,  by  many  members  of 
Parliament,  that  this  could  not  be  done  with 
out  a  declaration  of  martial  law;  and  in  that 
view  the  proceeding  was  condemned  by  them, 
and  especially  by  those  in  the  opposition,  j 
Two  speeches,  however,  in  the  House  of  Lords,  j 
may  be  regarded  as  triumphantly  maintaining  j 
the  contrary  opinion.  I  allude  to  the  speeches  j 
of  Lord  Chief  Justice  Mansfield  and  Lord 
Chancellor  Thurlow.  In  order  that  the  Com 
mission  may  see  the  ground  on  which  the  ac 
tion  of  the  military  was  placed  by  these  great 
men  and  by  Parliament — for  that  body  adopted 
their  views — I  shall  submit  a  brief  quotation 
from  that  of  the  former,  which  has  ever  since 
been  regarded  by  the  English  bar  as  an  au 
thority.  It  is  as  follows: 

"I  presume  it  is  known  to  His  Majesty's 
confidential  servants,  that  every  individual  in 


his  private  capacity,  may  lawfully  interfere 
to  suppress  a  riot,  much  more  to  prevent  acts 
of  felony,  treason  and  rebellion.  Not  only  is 
he  authorized  to  interfere  for  such  purpose, 
but  it  is  his  duty  to  do  so;  and,  if  called  upon 
by  a  magistrate,  he  is  punishable  in  case  of 
refusal.  What  any  single  individual  may 
lawfully  do  for  the  prevention  of  crime,  and 
preservation  of  public  peace,  may  be  done  by 
any  number  assembled  to  perform  their  duty 
as  good  citizens.  It  is  the  peculiar  business 
of  all  constables  to  apprehend  rioters,  to  en 
deavor  to  disperse  all  unlawful  assemblies, 
and,  in  case  of  resistance,  to  attack,  wound, 
nay,  kill  those  who  continue  to  resist;  taking 
care  not  to  commit  unnecessary  violence,  or 
to  abuse  the  power  legally  vested  in  them. 
Every  one  is  justified  in  doing  what  is  neces 
sary  for  the  faithful  discharge  of  the  duties 
annexed  to  his  office,  although  he  is  doubly 
culpable  if  he  wantonly  commits  an  illegal 
act,  under  the  color  or  pretext  of  law.  The 
persons  who  assisted  in  the  suppression  of 
these  tumults,  are  to  be  considered  mere  pri 
vate  individuals,  acting  as  duty  required. 

"My  Lords,  we  have  not  been  living  under 
martial  law,  but  under  that  law  which  it  has 
long  been  my  sacred  function  to  administer. 
For  any  violation  of  that  law,  the  offenders 
are  amenable  to  our  ordinary  courts  of  jus 
tice,  and  may  be  tried  before  a  jury  of  their 
countrymen. 

"  Supposing  a  soldier,  or  any  other  military 
person,  who  acted  in  the  course  of  the  late 
riots,  had  exceeded  the  powers  with  which  he 
was  invested,  I  have  not  a  single  doubt  that 
he  may  be  punished  not  by  a  court-martial,  but 
upon  an  indictment  to  be  found  by  the  grand 
inquest  of  the  city  of  London,  or  the  county 
of  Middlesex,  and  disposed  of  before  the  er- 
mined  Judges  sitting  in  Justice  Hall,  at  the 
Old  Bailey.  Consequently,  the  idea  is  false  that 
we  are  living  under  a  military  government,  or  that 
since  the  commencement  of  the  riots  any  part  of  the 
laws,  or  of  the  Constitution,  has  been  suspended,  or 
dispensed  with.  I  believe  that  much  mischief 
has  arisen  from  a  misconception  of  the  lliot 
Act,  which  enacts  that,  after  proclamation 
made,  persons  present  at  a  riotous  assembly 
shall  depart  to  their  homes,  and  that  those 
who  remain  there  above  an  hour  afterward, 
shall  be  guilty  of  felony,  and  liable  to  suffer 
death.  From  this  it  has  been  imagined  that 
the  military  can  not  act,  whatever  crimes 
may  be  committed  in  their  sight,  till  an  hour 
after  such  a  proclamation  has  been  made,  or 
as  it  is  termed,  the  'Riot  Act'  is  read.  But  the 
riot  act  only  introduces  a  new  offense — re 
maining  an  hour  after  the  proclamation — 
without  qualifying  any  pre-existing  law,  or 
abridging  the  means  which  before  existed  for 
preventing  or  punishing  crimes."  2  Camp 
bell's  Lives  of  the  Chief  Justices,  pp.  401,  402." 

The  same  can  not  be  said,  however,  of  the 
dependencies  of  the  British  crown.  Indeed, 
Ireland,  the  Indias,  and  other  provinces  have 
been  frequently  subjected  to  the  rigors  of 
martial  law — the  will  of  the  king's  lieutenants, 
or  of  the  commanding  general.  But  then,  it 
must  be  remembered  that  martial  law  has  not 
been  the  only  hardship  or  outrage  inflicted 


TREASON   TRIALS  *AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


209 


upon  them.  Any  one  who  will  but  read  the 
trial  of  Warren  Hastings,  must  be  satisfied, 
notwithstanding  his  acquittal,  that  in  her  col 
onies  and  dependencies,  Great  Britain  inflicts, 
permits,  or  can  not  prevent  great  crimes 
against  the  people.  Who  does  not  remember 
to  have  read  of  the  terrible  punishments  in- 
flicted  during  the  Sepoy  rebellion?  A  man  of 
sensibility  can  see,  "in  the  mind's  eye,"  the 
quivering  fragments  of  the  victims  of  martial 
law  flying  through  the  air,  as  they  are  blown 
from  the  mouths  of  cannon  ;  and  yet  even  the 
holy  horror  which  our  English  cousins  mani 
fest  at  our  cruelty  in  the  present  war,  has  not 
won  our  favor  for  their  mild  and  Christian 
warfare  as  practiced  in  India.  May  we  never 
be  won  to  approve  or  practice  such  lessons  of 
humanity  !  They  really  seem  to  regard  their 
provinces  as  subject  to  the  absolute  will  of  the 
domestic  government,  very  much  as  our  law 
books  treat  our  territories.  The  Constitution 
str.d  laws  do  not  exist  for  them.  It  was  to  rid 
themselves  of  such  a  relation,  and  from  the 
oppressions  incident  to  it,  that  the  people  of 
America  rebelled  against  the  parent  country; 
and,  after  eight  years  of  war,  established 
their  independence  and  freedom. 

But  before  I  quit  this  subject,  I  beg  leave  to 
notice  two  cases  occurring  in  remote  posses 
sions  of  Great  Britain,  and  which  have  be 
come  marked  in  history,  from  the  fact  that 
they  were  brought  within  the  reach,  and  sub- 
ir-cted  to  the  public  opinion  and  laws  of  that 
island. 

The  first  of  these,  is  the  case  of  Colonel 
Vrall,  Governor  of  Goree.  It  seems  that  this 
officer,  upon  some  apprehension  of  mutiny  in 
the  forces  at  his  post — an  apprehension  which 
may  or  may  not  have  been  well  founded,  so 
far  as  I  have  been  able  to  learn  from  the  very 
meager  report  of  the  evidence  found  in  the 
Annual  Register  for  1802,  p.  560 — convened  a 
drum-head  court-martial  one  evening  upon 
dress-parade,  and  ordered  a  sergeant  before  it 
for  immediate  trial.  The  Court  adjudged  him 
guilty,  and  sentenced  him  to  receive  eight 
hundred  lashes,  which  were  thereupon  in 
flicted  on  the  spot,  by  the  servants  of  the  Gov 
ernor,  who  stood  by  and  urged  them  to  lay  on, 
employing  language  indicative  of  great  pas 
sion.  The  sergeant  died  of  the  flogging.  The 
Governor  returned  to  .England,  where,  after 
some  two  or  three  years  had  elapsed,  he  was 
arrested  on  a  charge  of  murder.  He  escaped, 
and  remained  absent  for  seventeen  or  eighteen 
years,  when  he  returned  to  England,  was  re- 
arrested,  indicted,  tried  at  the  Old  Bailey,  con 
victed,  and  hungformurder, in  1802.  This  case 
strongly  marks  the  light  in  which  martial  law  is 
regarded  when  enforced  against  Englishmen; 
and  the  writer  of  the  report  of  the  trial  in  the 
Register,  employs  the  whole  case  as  an  illus 
tration,  on  the  one  hand,  of  the  harshness  of 
martial  law;  and,  on  the  other,  of  the  impar 
tial  justice  of  English  courts  and  juries. 

The  second  case  is  that  of  missionary  Smith, 
in  Demarara.  He  was  a  missionary  to  the  ne 
groes  of  that  colony.  Among  these,  in  1823  or 
1824,  an  insurrection  broke  out :  martial  law  was 
proclaimed;  and  the  rebellion  almost  imme 
diately  suppressed.  Having  already  incurred 
14 


the  ill-will  of  the  planters,  as  the  reward  of 
his  kindness  to  their  slaves,  he  was  arresied 
on  a  charge  of  having  had  knowledge  of  the 
insurrection  before  the  fact,  and  failing  to 
communicate  it  to  the  authorities;  and  was 
brought  to  trial  upon  this  charge  before  a 
court-martial,  and  convicted  and  sentenced  to 
be  hung.  Before  the  time  for  his  execution  ar 
rived,  however,  he  had  died  of  consumption. 
This  fact  alone,  it  would  seem,  from  what  sub 
sequently  transpired  in  Parliament,  saved  the 
parties  to  this  trial — the  Governor  and  mem 
bers  of  the  court — from  being  proceeded  against 
criminally.  Sir  James  Mackintosh,  in  a 
speech  of  great  power,  delivered  before  the 
House  of  Commons  in  regard  to  this  case,  said 
that  "the  acts  of  this  court  were  nullities, 
and  their  meeting  a  conspiracy;  that,  their 
sentence  was  a  direction  to  commit  a  crime; 
that  if  they  had  been  obeyed,  it  would  not 
have  been  an  execution,  but  a  murder;  and 
that  they,  and  all  other  parties  engaged  in  it, 
must  have  answered  for  it  with  their  lives." 
Miscellaneous  Essays,  etc.,  p.  542.  Lord  Broug 
ham,  in  a  masterly  speech  delivered  on  the 
same  occasion,  maintained  and  demonstrated 
the  nullity  of  the  sentence,  and  the  crimin 
ality  of  the  court,  1  Speeches,  p.  390-391.  Out 
of  Parliament,  the  Edinburg  Review  took  up  the 
case,  in  an  unanswerable  and  scathing  arti 
cle  of  more  than  forty  pages,  and  condemned 
the  whole  proceeding  to  everlasting  infamy. 
40  vol.,  p.  226,  (Old  Series). 

I  have  been  able  to  find  but  two  instances 
in  which  the  British  Government  declared 
martial  law  in  this  country  during  the  Revo 
lutionary  War.  The  first  of  these  occurred  at 
Boston,  Massachusetts,  June  12,  1775,  at  which 
time  General  Gage  issued  his  proclamation  of 
martial  law,  resting  it  expressly  upon  the 
ground  that,  owing  to  the  rebellion  of  the  peo 
ple,  the  ordinary  courts  of  justice  were  closed, 
and  the  course  of  justice  therein  stopped: 
and  the  consequent  necessity  of  proclaiming 
martial  law  as  a  substitute  for  the  common 
law.  Let  it  be  remembered,  that  this  was 
nearly  two  months  after  the  battles  of  Con 
cord  and  Lexington,  and  but  five  days  before 
that  of  Bunker  Hill,  and  that  Boston  was,  at 
the  time,  almost  in  a  state  of  siege,  and  it  will 
scarcely  be  thought,  by  any  one  living  in  our 
country  to-day,  that  this  procedure  was  pre 
mature.  Nevertheless,  in  the  opinion  of 
Americans  of  that  day,  it  was  an  outrage  well 
worthy  to  crown  all  the  rest  for  which  they 
were  then  every-where  rushing  to  arms.  It 
was  spoken  of  in  the  old  Congress  as  an  at 
tempt  "to  supersede  the  course  of  the  com 
mon  law,  and  instead  thereof,  to  publish  and 
order  the  use  of  martial  laic."  Journal  of  the 
Old  Congress,  147;  Ann.  Reg.  1775,  p.  261. 

Governor  Dunmore  adopted  a  similar  meas 
ure  in  Virginia.  November  7th.  1775,  which 
the  Virginia  Assembly  met  and  denounced  ns 
"an  assumed  power  which  the  King  himself 
can  not  exercise;  because  it  annuls  the  laws 
of  the  land,  and  introduces  the  most  execra 
ble  of  all  systems — martial  law."  4  Am.  Ar 
chives,  87;  Ann.  Reg.  1775,  p.  28. 

Sometime  after  the  close  of  the  war  of  In 
dependence,  and  about  the  time  of  the  adop- 


210 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


tion  of  our  present  Constitution,  I  believe  in 
the  year  1787,  a  rebellion  occurred  in  the 
State  of  Massachusetts.  It  is  known  in  his 
tory  as  Shay's  Rebellion.  When  it  became  too 
strong  for  the  civil  arm  of  the  State  govern 
ment,  and  the  militia,  were  finally  called  out,  it 
was  not  to  supersede  the  civil  authority,  but 
was  strictly  employed  in  aid  thereof.  The 
writ  of  habeas  corpus  was,  indeed,  suspended 
for  a  brief  period;  but  no  martiallaivw&s  pro 
claimed  or  enforced  against  the  insurgents. 
On  the  contrary,  Governor  Bowdoin  directed 
General  Lincoln  to  "consider  himself,  in  all 
his  military  offensive  operations,  constantly 
as  under  the  direction  of  the  civil  officer,  say 
ing  when  any  armed  force  shall  appear  and 
oppose  his  marching  to  execute  these  orders." 
In  this  way,  the  rebellion,  though  formidable 
both  for  its  numbers,  and  the  extensive  sym 
pathy  it  received  among  the  people  of  the 
State  who  did  not  yet  openly  engage  in  it,  was 
put  down  almost  without  bloodshed;  and 
peace,  order  and  good  feeling  were  restored. 
I  am  now  brought  to  the  era  of  the  Federal 
Constitution;  and  we  can  form  some  notion 
of  what  was,  most  likely,  the  opinions  and 
sentiments  of  its  authors  in  relation  to  martial 
law,  as  an  incident  of  the  Government  they 
were  about  to  establish  for  themselves.  They 
had  received  their  notions  of  law  from  a 
country  in  which  martial  law  had  not  been  exer 
cised  for  more  than  one  hundred  years ;  they 
had  suffered,  in  two  instances,  during  the  late 
war,  the  outrage  of  martial  law;  and  had  re 
pelled  and  denounced  it  as  wholly  incompati 
ble  with  the  limitations  imposed  by  law  upon 
the  King's  prerogative.  They  had  claimed  the 
great  acts  of  English  liberty  as  their  rightful 
inheritance.  (4  Franklin's  Works,  274).  They 
had  asserted  their  independence;  because, 
among  other  reasons,  the  King  "had  affected 
to  render  the  military  independent  of,  and  su 
perior  to,  the  civil  power,"  which  was  sim 
ply  an  attempt  to  establish  martial  law.  And, 
finally,  they  had  jus-t  seen  a  formidable  domes 
tic  rebellion  in  one  of  the  States,  go  down  be 
fore  the  local  authorities  thereof,  without  a 
declaration  of  martial  law,  and  almost  without 
the  shedding  of  blood.  Now,  may  I  not  ask, 
Is  there  a  single  fact  in  all  the  experience  of 
these  men,'  that  could  possibly  have  given  rise 
to  a  wish  on  their  part  for  a  Government  ca 
pable  upon  every  occasion,  offered  by  invasion 
or  rebellion,  of  suspending  all  its  ordinary 
functions,  and  calling  into  play  "the  odious 
system  of  martial  law?'1  On  the  contrary,  we 
are  led  to  conclude,  that,  with  the  ordinary 
feelings  of  men,  they  must  have  been  utterly 
and  intensely  hostile  to  any  such  power  in 
their  Government.  This  would  be  our  conclu 
sion,  if  they  had  .left  us  no  record  on  the  sub 
ject.  But  they  have  left  us  their  solemn  tes 
timony  in  the  Constitution,  and  it  completely 
sustains  the  conclusion  to  which  we  are  led 
by  reasoning  from  the  history  of  the  past,  and 
their  experience;  for,  if  ever  any  Constitu 
tion  did  entirely  shut  out  the  idea  of  any 
power  being  vested  in  any  department  of  the 
Government  to  declare  martial  law,  it  is  that 
of  the  United  States  of  America.  From  its 
very  nature,  no  less  than  by  its  express  terms, 


any  such  power  is  rendered  totally  impossi 
ble,  while  a  vestige  of  the  Constitution  re 
mains.  Let  us  examine  it,  and  see. 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  a  Government  created 
by  a  written  constitution,  which  limits  it  to 
the  exercise  of  specified  powers.  The  first 
section  of  the  instrument  stamps  its  entire 
character.  Thus:  "All  legislative  power  herein 
granted,  shall  be  vested,"  etc.  But  this  is  not 
all.  After  granting  the  powers  intended  for 
the  Government,  it  limits  them  by  express  de 
nials  of  others,  which  would  otherwise  have 
been  embraced  in  those  granted.  The  ninth 
section  of  the  first  article,  is  thus  wholly  de 
voted  to  these  denials  of  powers.  Among 
these  negative  provisions  are  some  utterly  in 
compatible  with  the  notion  that  the  framers 
of  the  Constitution  could  have  entertained  the 
thought,  even  for  a  moment,  of  conferring  the 
power  upon  any  department  of  the  Govern 
ment,  to  declare  martial  law  over  the  whole 
United  States,  or  any  part  of  it,  where  the 
presence  of  embattled  hostile  armies  had  not 
already  suspended  all  civil  authority.  Take 
a  single  instance:  "The  privilege  of  the 
writ  of  habeas  corpus  shall  not  be  suspended,  un 
less  when,  in  cases  of  rebellion  or  invasion, 
the  public  safety  may  require  it."  Now,  we 
have  already  seen  that  martial  law  is  the  sus 
pension  of  the  civil  law,  and  of  all  the  func 
tions  of  the  civil  government — not  only  of 
the  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  but  of  all  other  pro 
cess  and  laws  whatever.  Why  should  the  Consti 
tution  limit  the  powerof  suspending  privileges 
to  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  alone,  and  strictly  to 
cases  of  rebellion  and  invasion,  " when  the  pub 
lic  safety  may  require  it,"  if  its  authors  had  un 
derstood,  or  intended  that,  in  every  such  case, 
all  other  provisions  of  the  Constitution  and 
laws,  designed  to  protect  the  citizen  against 
the  encroachments  of  arbitrary  power,  might 
be  suspended  at  pleasure,  by  the  President,  all 
over  the  country;  or  by  any  General,  all  over 
his  department?  The  specific  limitation  of 
this  power  of  suspension,  to  this  one  writ,  in 
any  extreme  public  necessity,  the  public 
safety,  "in  cases  of  rebellion  or  invasion," 
forever  explodes  the  notion  that  they  intended 
to  confer,  in  such  cases,  the  power  to  suspend 
all  other  writs  and  rights  arising  under  the 
Constitution  and  laws  of  the  land.  The  ex 
pression  of  one  excludes  the  rest. 

Let  us,  however,  briefly  consider  this  pre 
tended  power  to  proclaim  martial  law  with 
special  relation  to  a  Government  like  ours — a 
Government  with  a  written  and  limited  Con 
stitution.  The  power  in  question,  provided  it 
exists,  must  reside  in  some  one,  or  in  some 
two,  or  in  all  three  of  the  departments  of  the 
Government.  The  categories  are  exhaustive. 

It  will  not  be  pretended  that  it  resides  in 
the  Jucliciai-y  alone;  nor,  indeed,  that  »ny 
portion  of  it  is  vested  therein.  All  writers 
who  have  supported  the  power,  are  silent  as  to 
any  portion  of  it  residing  in  the  Judiciary. 
But  not  only  so,  the  Supreme  Court  itself, 
when  called' to  discuss  the  subject,  seem  to 
regard  it  as  vested  elsewhere  by  the  Constitu 
tion,  provided  it  exist  at  all.  This  is  as  it 
should  be;  for  that  department  is,  by  its  char 
ter,  confined  to  the  exercise  of  judicial  func 


TREASON    TRIALS    AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


211 


tions;  and  it  will  not  be  claimed  that  the 
entire  suspension  of  such  functions,  and  the 
laws  upon  which  they  depend,  is  a  judicial 
function.  Such  a  suspension  of  the  Judi 
ciary  must  come  from  without  that  depart 
ment.  It  has  to  do  with  the  laws,  and  with 
rights  and  wrongs  under  them;  and  as  long 
as  a  case  is  presented  to  the  courts  under  ex 
isting  laws,  they  must,  from  their  nature, 
needs  act  upon  it.  But  this  constitutional 
necessity  under  which  the  Judiciary  is  placed, 
is  directly  at  war  with  the  nature  and  exist 
ence  of  martial  law,  which  puts  an  end,  for  the 
time  being,  to  the  courts.  In  other  words, 
martial  latv  can  only  exist  when  the  courts 
have  ceased  to  exist.  As  long  as  they  remain 
open,  martial  law  remains  impossible.  Hence, 
the  courts  can  not  possess  any  power  to  de 
clare,  or  aid  others  in  declaring  martial  law. 
The  power  in  question  must,  therefore,  reside 
in  the  Legislative  or  Executive  departments 
separately;  or  in  both  together,  provided  it 
exist  at  all. 

Is  the  power  in  question  vested  in  Congress 
alone?  If  so,  then  what  follows  upon  its  ex 
ercise?  Have  you  ever  thought  of  that?  If 
you  have  not,  let  me  show  you  what  must  be 
the  result.  It  is  this:  A  declaration  of  mar 
tial  law  would,  for  the  time  being,  put  an  end 
to  the  functions  of  Congress;  arid  it  would  do 
so,  by  placing  an  absolutely  unlimited  power 
in  the  hands  of  the  President,  or  of  his  Gen 
erals.  Now,  if  Congress  had  this  absolute 
power  to  bestow,  does  not  all  history  tell  us 
that  once  gone  from  their  hands,  it  would  be 
gone  forever?  But  you  know  that  Congress 
has  no  such  power  to  confer.  A  single  limita 
tion  upon  the  powers  of  Congress  gives  the  lie 
to  any  such  assumption  of  power  as  is  implied 
in  a  proclamation  of  martial  law.  And  yet  the 
whole  charter  of  Congress  is  hedged  in  by 
limitations — nothing  but  limitations;  limita 
tions  as  to  the  subjects  of  their  jurisdiction; 
limitations  as  to  their  mode  of  proceeding  in 
the  attainment  of  specified  objects;  and  limit 
ations  by  the  express  reservation  of  all  powers 
not  granted  to  the  Federal  Government,  to  the 
people  or  the  States.  All  the  powers  denied 
to  Congress  in  the  Constitution,  leave  that 
body  so  much  less  power  than  is  necessary  to 
a  proclamation  of  martial  law.  All  the  powers 
reserved  to  the  people  and  States  by  the  Con 
stitution,  is  a  further  limitation  of  the  power 
requisite  to  a  proclamation  of  martial  law.  All 
the  power  legitimately  in  the  hands  of  the 
Judiciary,  is  still  a  further  limitation  of  the 
power  requisite  to  enable  Congress  to  establish 
martial  law.  And  the  same  may  be  said  of  the 
rightful  powers  of  the  Executive.  Hence,  it 
is  plain  that  Congress  has  no  power  to  pro 
claim  or  authorize  the  proclamation  of  martial 
law,  which,  according  to  the  definition  thereof, 
given  by  all  writers  on  the  subject,  makes  the 
will  of  the  Commander-in-chief  the  supreme  and 
only  law  of  the  land;  or,  to  use  the  language  of 
Mr.  Webster,  empowers  the  "officer  clothed 
with  it,  to  judge  of  the  degree  of  force  that 
the  necessity  of  the  case  may  demand;  and," 
lie  adds,  "there  is  no  limit  to  this,  except  such  as 
is  to  be  found  in  the  nature  and  character  of  the 
exigency."  Webster's  Works,  6  vol.,  pp.  240,  241. 


But  grant  for  the  argument,  that  Congress  has 
this  power,  what  would  be  the  inevitable  result 
of  its  exercise?  All  history  tells  us  that  such  an 
act  would  be  the  suicide  of  the  National  Legis 
lature.  All  liberty,  all  laws  designed  to  secure 
liberty,  all  free  institutions  would  perish  by 
the  rash  act;  for  what  would  laws,  liberties, 
institutions,  or  life  itself  be  worth,  when  all 
were  placed  at  the  will  of  an  absolute  master? 
The  exigency  in  which  such  power  passed 
from  the  representatives  of  the  people,  would 
be  readily  continued  by  him  on  whom  it  was 
conferred.  The  Government  would  be  changed 
by  the  act  from  the  freest  to  the  most  simple 
and  absolute  despotism  on  earth.  Congress, 
therefore,  has  no  such  power  to  confer:  1 
Because  it  is  incompatible  with  the  limitations 
imposed  upon  the  powers  of  that  body,  both 
by  denial  and  reservation.  2.  Because  it 
would  be  a  power  of  self-destruction;  and  we 
can  not  justly  hold  that  it  was  intended  by 
the  framers  of  the  Constitution,  that  any  Con 
gress  should,  in  its  discretion  in  a  given 
emergency,  put  an  end,  not  only  to  its  own 
existence,  but  to  the  possible  existence  of  any 
future  Congress. 

If  the  power  in  question  belongs  to  the 
President  alone,  then,  in  times  of  invasion  or 
rebellion — times  like  these — the  Constitution 
of  the  country  affords  no  better  guaranty  for 
the  security  of  the  lives,  liberty,  and  property 
of  the  .people,  than  his  will.  And  is  that  the 
end  of  the  labors  and  solicitude  of  Washing 
ton  and  his  compatriots,  for  the  establishment 
of  a  free  people  upon  the  American  continent? 
What  signifies  a  limitation  on  the  power  -of 
the  Judiciary  and  on  that  of  Congress,  if  the 
President  has,  in  any  event,  an  unlimited 
power  over  both,  and  all  else  in  the  land? 
The  power,  then,  does  not  belong  to  the  Presi 
dent  alone. 

The  same  result  is  attained,  if  the  power  to 
proclaim  martial  law  is  conceded  to  reside  in 
the  Congress  and  President  jointly;  or,  in 
deed,  in  all  the  departments  of  the  Govern 
ment  together;  for  its  exercise  involves  the 
transformation  of  the  entire  Government  from 
one  limited  and  free,  at  least  in  form,  to  one 
unlimited  and  despotic,  both  in  form  and  in 
fact.  So  that,  in  any  view  we  can  possibly 
take  of  this  power,  it  can  not  exist  in  a  lim 
ited  government  created  by  a  written  consti 
tution.  It  is,  indeed,  an  absurdity  too  gross 
to  be  admitted,  until  all  pretense  of  liberties 
and  rights  on  the  part  of  the  people  is  utterly 
abandoned. 

But  let  us  now  glance  at  the  war  power  con 
ferred  by  the  Constitution  upon  the  Govern 
ment,  and  ascertain  where  it  is  vested.  Is 
any  part  of  it  bestowed  upon  the  President 
by  original  constitutional  grant?  If  not,  upon 
what  basis  are  we  to  rest  the  stupendous  pow 
ers  claimed  for  him,  as  the  foundation  of 
your  jurisdiction?  Let  us  examine,  and  see 
how  he  stands. 

He  is,  I  grant,  appointed  Commander-in- 
chief  by  the  Constitution;  but  where  is  his 
command  ?  It  is  in  the  discretion  of  Congress. 
If  that  body  determine  to  have  no  army,  why, 
then,  the  President  can  have  none  to  command. 
If  Congress  takes  the  same  view  in  regard  to 


212 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


a  navy,  the  President,  again,  will  be  in  pre-  found.  The  Government,  of  the  Union  can 
ciscly  the  same  situation  as  a  naval  officer,  not,  therefore,  assert  the  power  in  question, 
Without  an  act  of  Congress,  he  can  not,  there- j  for  two  reasons,  namely: 

fore,  raise  a  single  soldier,  or  seaman,  or  build  1.  Because  the  people  of  the  several  States 
a  ship,  or  fort,  or  do  any  other  military  act '  of  the  Union  have  formed  no  society — no  corn- 
whatever.  If  Congress  do  not  raise  an  army,  munity — beyond  that  which  results  from  the 
he  can  have  no  military  power  to  repel  inva-  j  terms  of  the  Constitution, 
sion,  or  suppress  insurrection.  But,  if  Con-  {  2.  Because  the  exercise  of  such  a  power  by 
gress  authorize  him  to  raise  an  army  and  j  the  Federal  Government  would  destroy  the 
navy,  and  provide  him  with  the  means  neces-!  several  distinct  societies  now  represented  by 
sary  to  the  end,  they  may  still  provide  just !  the  several  State  governments;  and  to  such 
such  rules  and  regulations  for  the  government  I  destruction  neither  the  people  nor  the  govern- 
thereof  as  they  please,  and  may  thus  leave  j  ments  of  the  States  have  ever  consented, 
him  little  or  no  power  over  either.  The  same  But  from  such  destruction  of  the  States  fol- 
is  true  of  the  militia  of  the  several  States.;  lows  inevitably  the  destruction  of  the  Federal 
They  are  to  be  organized,  armed,  and  discip-j  Government;  for  the  States  are  in  many  and 
lined  according  to  the  will  of  Congress;  and  i  essential  regards  constituents  of  that  Gov- 
Congress  alone  has  power  to  provide  for  call-!  ernment,  which  can  not  exist  without  them, 
ing  them  forth  to  execute  the  laws  of  the  That  the  Federal  Government  is  thus  limited 


Union,  suppress  insurrection,  and  repel  inva 
sion.  The  President  is  powerless  on  all  these 
subjects  until  Congress  invigorate  him.  The 
very  terms  which  designate  him  as  Command 
er-in-chief  of  the  army  and  navy,  afid  of  the 
militia  of  the  several  States,  limit  his  power 
over  the  last,  until  they  are  "called  into  the 
actual  service  of  the  United  States.1'  Is  it  not 
preposterous,  then,  to  say  of  such  an  officer  — 
one  so  entirely  dependent  upon  Congress  for 
every  element  of  military  power,  and  bound 
to  accept  it,  subject  to  just  such  rules  and 
regulations  as  they  impose — that  he  is,  never 
theless,  authorized,  upon  a  given  ^emergency, 
"to  sweep  the  Constitution  and  laws  of  the 
country  by  the  board,"  as  Mr.  Adams  expressed 
it;  to  annihilate,  for  the  time  being,  all  the 
powers  and  functions  of  Congress  and  the 
Judiciary,  by  virtue  of  this  same  power,  thus 
dependent  upon  Congress;  and,  going  still 
further,  to  create  a  new  political  society,  by 
equalizing  all  the  people  of  the  several  States, 
by  abolishing  their  several  governments  and 
institutions,  and  consolidating  them  into  one 
social  and  political  state,  subject  to  one  law 
only — his  own  mere  will;  for  this  is  martial 
laic.  The  power  contended  for  by  the  Judge 
Advocate,  as  the  basis  of  your  jurisdiction, 
leads  to  this  monstrous  result;  and  some  of 
the  opinions  cited  in  support  of  it,  may  even 
go  to  this  extent. 

It  is,  therefore,  plain  to  my  mind  that  the 
several  departments  of  the  Government  do  not 
possess  the  power  in  question,  either  jointly 
or  severally;  for,  if  given,  it  would  be  a  power 
to  subvert  the  Constitution  and  overthrow  the 
Government. 

But  the  nature  and  objects  of  the  political 
society  over  which  the  Government  of  the 
United  States  was  organized  to  preside,  pre 
cludes  the  idea  that  any  such  power,  as  that 
of  declaring  martial  laic,  can  exist  therein. 
That  society  is  confined  and  limited  in  its 
objects  and  purposes  \>y  the  Constitution;  and, 
in  fact,  has  no  existence  beyond  the  terms  of 
that  instrument.  The  relations  that  in  all 
consolidated  nations  most  deeply  and  nearly 
interest  mankind,  and  most  strongly  bind 
them  together,  are  not  embraced  in  the  pur 
poses  and  scope  of  the  Federal  Union  at  all. 
It  is  in  the  States  that  the  great  elements  and 


by  its  Constitution,  and  from  the  special  char 
acter  of  the  political  society  upon  which  it 
rests,  is  proven  by  its  whole  history.  It  can 
not,  like  a  government  of  general  powers, 
with  no  limitations  upon  them  which  it  may 
not  by  its  own  legitimate  act  remove,  exercise 
any  power  not  conferred  upon  it  by  the  char 
ter  of  its  creation.  If  its  officers  should  do 
so,  their  acts  are  not  the  acts  of  the  Govern 
ment;  but  simply  the  acts  of  the  individuals 
who  do  them;  and  are  in  no  wise  binding 
upon  the  people  who  have  never  consented  to 
them.  Whitaker  v.  English,  1  Bay's  Rep.,  15; 
Thaijer  v.  Hedges  et  al.,  22  Ind.  Rep.,  282;  Wil- 
cox  v.  Griffin,  21  Id.,  370;  and  Little  et  al.  v. 
Barreme  et  al.,  2  Cranctis  Rep.,  p.  170. 

In  this  respect  the  British  Government  has 
greatly  the  advantage  over  ours;  for  there  are 
no  written  limitations  upon  its  powers,  which 
Parliament — being  omnipotent — may  not  ex 
pand  or  remove  altogether.  A  declaration  of 
martial  law  by  an  act  of  Parliament;  or  under 
an  authority  granted  thereby;  or  with  the 
assurance  that  an  act  of  indemnity  will  fol 
low  it,  is  in  no  wise  inconsistent  with  the 
British  Constitution.  The  highest  written  ele 
ment  in  that  constitution  does  not  rise  above  an 
act  of  Parliament.  Parliament,  at  all  times,  rep 
resents  the  entire  sum  of  all  the  politico-social 
capability,  or  possibility  of  the  whole  country. 
It  may,  therefore,  properly  take  any  step  it 
may  deem  necessary  for  the  conservation  of 
the  society  over  which  it  presides.  As  Parlia 
ment  itself  is  but  a  means  to  an  end — the 
preservation  and  well-being  of  that  society — 
it  may,  in  a  great  emergency,  without  viola 
ting  any  fundamental  principle,  surrender  its 
own  existence.  And  yet,  a  declaration  of 
martial  law  is  said  to  be  unconstitutional  there, 
by  a  high  legal  and  military  functionary  of 
that  country.  Hough's  Precedents  in  Military 
Law,  p.  543. 

In/view  of  all  this,  it  seems  passing  strange 
that  the  Government  of  the  United  States 
should  ever  have  been  compared  with  that  of 
Great  Britain  in  relation  to  the  establishment 
of  this  transcendent  fact;  and  still  more 
strange  that  the  President  should  have  been 
set  up  as  the  equal  in  this  respect  of  the 
King — nay,  as  his  superior.  The  entire  pro 
ceedings  of  the  convention  that  framed  the 


relations  of  political  society  are  principally   Constitution,  go  to  discountenance  any  such 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


213 


position.  They  intended  to  create  an  execu 
tive  with  altogether  less  authority  than  the 
King  of  ^eat  Britain;  and  they  succeeded 
in  doing  so,  if  it  is  possible  to  impose  limita 
tions  by  means  of  a  written  Constitution. 
How  they  regarded  this  part  of  their  work, 
after  its  accomplishment,  may  be  learned  from 
the  Federalist.  (No.  09  Hallo  w  eW  &  ed.,  1831,  p. 
847).  It  is  not  contended  that  the  king  can 
rightfully  suspend  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus; 
I >ut  in  times  of  great  emergency,  he  is  per 
mitted  to  do  so  until  the  next  meeting  of  Par 
liament,  when  an  act  of  indemnity  must  be 
passed  for  the  protection  of  those  who  were, 
iu  anywise,  engaged  in  such  suspension, 
against  civil  prosecutions  on  account  thereof. 
Now,  this  act  of  indemnity  is  an  admission  of 
the  original  illegality  of  the  previous  suspen 
sion;  for  it  is  passed  for  the  purpose  of  curing 
it,  and  giving  it  the  sanction  of  law.  But 
Dr.  Francis  Lieber  maintains  that  there  can 
no  passed  no  valid  act  of  indemnity  by  a 
government  created  by,  and  acting  under  a 
written  Constitution  like  ours;  and  this  opin 
ion  he  cites  in  a  second  treatise  published 
many  years  after  his  work  on  Legal  and  Polit 
ical  Hcrmeneutics  was  given  to  the  public. 
(Hermcneutics,  pp.  79,  80;  and  Civil  Liberty  and 
Self -Government,  vol.  1,  p.  134).  If  argument 
were  wanting  to  support  this  authority,  it 
arises  from  the  very  nature  of  our  Constitu 
tion.  But  I  leave  it  to  stand  upon  the  author 
ity  of  a  great  name,  adorned  not  only  by  great 
learning  devoted  to  the  noblest  purposes  of 
science;  but,  also,  to  the  support  of  the  cause 
of  his  adopted  country  in  the  existing  struggle 
for  the  integrity  of  its  territory  and  the  su 
premacy  of  its  Constitution.  And  yet,  I 
know,  there  are  not  wanting  men,  native  to 
the  manor  born,  who  claim  that  the  President 
has  the  power,  under  the  Constitution,  to  sus 
pend  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  .  But  do  they 
forget  that  no  such  opinion  was  ever  expressed 
by  any  one  who  had  a  hand  in  framing  the 
Constitution,  or  who  lived  and  acted  with 
them  ?  Mr.  Jefferson  did  not  think  so*  (2 
Jefferson's  Corresp.,  pp.  274,  291 ;  Id.,  344).  On 
the  contrary,  he  went  to  Congress  and  asked 
for  a  suspension  of  the  writ  at  the  time  of 
Burr's  conspiracy;  and,  while  they  refused  to 
suspend  it,  not  a  member  of  that  body  was 
found  to  question  the  fact  that  the  power  to 
po.ss  such  an  act,  under  proper  circumstances, 
was  vested  in  them.  3  Bcnioris  Debates  in 
Congress,  p.  504  et  seq. 

About  the  same  time,  in  the  case  of  two 
men  imprisoned  by  order  of  the  President  for 
complicity  in  that  conspiracy,  Chief-Justice 
Marshall,  in  speaking  upon  the  writ  of  habeas 
corpus,  and  the  act  of  Congress  which  author 
izes  judges  and  courts  of  the  United  States  to 
grant  it,  said : 

"It  may  be  worthy  of  remark  that  this  act 
was  passed  by  the  first  Congress  of  the  United 
States,  sitting  under  a  Constitution  which  had 
declared  'that  the  privilege  of  the  writ  of 
habeas  corpus  should  not  be  suspended,  unless 
when,  in  cases  of  rebellion  or  invasion,  the 
public  safety  may  require  it.'  Acting  under 
theimmediate  inliuenceof  this  injunction,  they 
must  have  felt  with  peculiar  force  the  obliga- 


ition  of  providing  efficient  means  by  which 
this  great  constitutional  privilege  should  re 
ceive  life  and  activity;  for  if  the  means  be  not 
in  existence,  the  privilege  itself  would  be  lost, 
although  no  law  for  its  suspension  should  be 
enacted.  Under  the  impression  of  this  obli 
gation,  they  gave  all  the  courts  the  power  of 
awarding  writs  of  habeas  corpus.  *  *  * 

"If,  at  any   time,  the    public   safety  should 

require  the  suspension  of  the  powers  vested 

by  this  act  in  the  courts  of  the  United  States, 

it  is  for  the  Legislature  to  sat/  so.     That  question 

depends  on  political  considerations,  on  which 

I  the  Legislature  is  to  decide.      Lentil  the  legislative 

I  will  be  expressed,   the  court  can  only  see  its  duty, 

and  must  obey  the  laws.''     4  Cranch's  Reports,  pp. 

75,  137. 

In  this  opinion  concur  all  respectable  au 
thorities  that  I  have  been  able  to  consult. 
Among  them  are  Rawle,  Sedgewick,  Story, 
and  the  late  Chief-Justice  Taney.  Rawle  on 
the  Const.,  pp.  114, 115;  2  Story  ontheComt.,%1312; 
Sedgewick  on  the  Const,  and  Statute  Law,  p.  598; 
and  9  Am.  Law  Reg.,  p.  524. 

But  if  the  President  has  no  power  to  sus 
pend  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  and  Congress 
no  power  to  indemnify  him,  and  those  acting 
under  his  orders,  for  forcibly  denying  it.  then 
it  follows  that  he  can  not  have  the  far  greater 
power  of  proclaiming  martial  law — a  power 
which  embraces  the  suspension  not  only  of 
the  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  but  of  all  other  writs 
and  laws,  even  the  Constitution  itself. 

And  hence,  I  conclude,  that  there  is  not,  and 
can  not  possibly  be,  any  power  in  a  government 
like  ours  to  declare  martial  law,  unless  it  be 
upon  the  theater  of  active  military  opera 
tions;  and  that  every  such  declaration  of  mar 
tial  law,  in  any  State  or  place,  not  subject  to 
such  operations,  is  mere  naked  unauthorized 
force,  and  altogether  unjustifiable;  that  the 
true  test  of  the  presence,  in  any  State  or 
place,  of  such  military  operations  as  justifies 
a  proclamation  of  martial  law,  is  found  iu  the 
fact  that  the  courts  of  justice  therein  are 
closed,  and  the  administration  of  justice 
stopped  by  the  presence  of  hostile  armies; 
that,  whenever  that  is  not  the  case  in  any  part 
of  the  United  States,  martial  law'in  no  possible 
view,  can  rightfully  exist;  and,  finally,  as  the 
courts  of  justice  in  this  State  are  proven,  in 
this  case,  to  be  open  at  this  time,  and  to  have 
been  so  all  the  time,  both  before  and  since  the 
arrest  of  the  .accused,  any  attempt  to  enforce 
martial  law  against  them  is  a  grievous  wrong, 
not  only  to  them,  but  to  the  whole  country; 
and,  indeed,  to  the  general  cause  of  freedom 
and  free  government  throughout  the  world. 

While  upon  this  branch  of  the  subject — the 
power  to  declare  martial  law — I  beg  leave  to  re 
peat  a  few  propositions  urged  in  a  former 
trial.  I  am  now  prepared  to  support  them  by 
high  military  authority,  which  was  not  then 
at  hand.  They  are  as  follows: 

"The  charges  in  this  cause  involve  capital 
and  infamous  crimes;  and  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States  expressly  provides  that 

"'No  person  shall  be  held  to  answer  for  a 
capital  or  otherwise  infamous  crime,  unless 
on  a  presentment  or  indictment  by  a  grand 
jury;  except  in  cases  arising  in  the  land  or 


214 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


naval  forces,  or  in  the  militia  when  in  actual 
service  in  time  of  war  or  public  danger.' 
(Amend.  Const.  U.  S.,  Art.  5).  And,  again,  'in 
all  criminal  cases,  the  prisoner  shall  enjoy 
the  right  to  a  speedy  and  public  trial,  by  an 
impartial  jury  of  the  State  and  district  where 
the  crime  shall  have  been  committed,'  etc. 
Amend.  Const.,  Art.  6. 

"  These  pi-ovisions  were  adopted  after  the 
organization  of  the  Government  of  the  United 
States  under  the  present  Constitution,  and  for 
the  purpose  of  placing  the  trial  by  jury  en 
tirely  beyond  the  power  of  Congress,  and  of 
all  other"  branches  of  the  Government.  The 
Constitution,  as  originally  adopted,  contained 
the  following  provision  on  the  subject:  'The 
trial  of  all  crimes,  except  in  cases  of  impeach 
ment,  shall  be  by  jury;  and  such  trial  shall 
be  held  in  the  State  where  such  crime  shall 
have  been  committed.'  (Art.  4,  $  2).  So  jeal 
ous  Avere  the  people  of  the  right  in  question 
that  they  required  the  amendments  I  have  al 
ready  quoted,  notwithstanding  this  original 
provision. 

"The  accused  are  citizens  of  the  United 
States,  and  of  the  State  of  Indiana,  not  in  the 
land  or  naval  forces,  or  in  the  militia  in  ac 
tual  service.  They  are,  therefore,  not  within 
the  exception  of  the  fifth  article  of  amend 
ments  just  cited.  The  exception  does  not  af 
fect  their  right  any  more  than  if  it  did  not 
exist.  [On  the  contrary,  it  makes  it  alto 
gether  more  clear  and  undeniable].  These 
several  provisions  are  absolute  as  to  them; 
nnd  if  any  constitutional  provisions  can  pro 
tect  a  right,  it  would  seem  they  ought  to  be 
protected  from  a  trial  not  in  conformity  with 
them.  Indeed,  it  would  seem,  they  can  not,  in 
fairness,  be  tried  without  being  first  presented 
or  indicted  by  a  grand  jury,  nor  without  a 
petit  jury  of  the  district  wherein  their  alleged 
offenses  were  committed." 

Lieutenant  General  Scott,  in  his  Autobiog 
raphy,  republishes  an  article  published  by  him 
in  the  National  Intelligencer,  in  1842.  From 
this  article  I  extract  the  following  paragraphs, 
which  immediately  follow  the  amendments 
of  the  Constitution  already  quoted: 

"If  these  amendments  do  not  expressly  se 
cure  the  citizen,  not  belonging  to  the  army, 
from  the  possibility  of  being  dragged  before  a 
council  of  war,  or  court-martial,  for  any  crime, 
or  on  any  pretense  whatsoever,  then  there  can 
be  no  security  for  any  human  right,  under  any  hu 
man  institutions  I 

"Congress  and  the  President  could  not,  if 
they  were  unanimous,  proclaim  martial  law,  in 
any  portion  of  the  United  States,  without  first 
throwing  these  amendments  into  the  fire.  If 
Mr.  Madison  (begging  pardon  of  his  memory 
for  the  violent  supposition)  had  sent  an  order 
to  General  Jackson  to  establish  the  odious 
code  over  the  citizens  of  New  Orleans,  during, 
before,  or  after  the  siege  of  that  capital, 
it  would  have  been  the  duty  of  the  General, 
under  his  oath,  to  obey  the  Constitution,  and 
to  have  withheld  obedience;  for,  by  the  Ninth 
Article  of  War  (the  only  one  on  orders),  officers 
are  not  required  to  obey  any  but  '  lawful  com 
mands.'  "  Vol.  1,  p.  292. 
Again,  he  says: 


"When  Pompey  played  the  petty  tyrant  at 
Sicily,  as  the  lieutenant  of  that  master  despot 
Sylla,  he  summoned  before  him  the^Iammer- 
tines.  That  people  refused  to  appear,  alleging 
that  they  stood  excused  by  an  ancient  privi 
lege  granted  them  by  the  Komans.  'What,' 
said  Sylla's  lieutenant,  'will  you  never  have 
done  with  citing  laws  and  privileges  to  men 
who  wear  swords.'  Roman  liberty  had  already 
been  lost  in  the  distemperature  of  the  times. 
*  *  jf  pOmpey  had  gained  the  battle  of 
Pharsalia,  would  his  odious  reply  to  the  Mam- 
mertines  have  been  forgiven  by  the  lovers  of 
human  liberty?  With  such  maxims  of  Govern 
ment,  it  was  of  little  consequence  to  the  Ro 
man  world  that  Caesar  won  the  day.  A  Verres 
would  have  been  as  good  as  either."  Id.,  p.  294. 
He  also  gives  the  following  fact  in  our  own 
history,  which,  although  a  little  out  of  its 
place,  I  yet  beg  leave  to  insert  as  indicative 
of  the  spirit  in  which  the  struggle  of  1776 
was  conducted  by  the  founders  of  our  Gov 
ernment: 

"In  South  Carolina,  during  the  Revolution 
ary  War,  at  the  moment  when  Sir  Henry 
Clinton  was  investing  the  devoted  city  of 
Charleston,  and  the  tories  in  arms  every 
where,  the  Legislature  empowered  her  excel 
lent  Governor,  John  Rutledge,  after  consulting 
with  such  of  his  council  as  he  conveniently 
could,  'to  do  every  thing  necessary  for  the 
public  good,  except  the  taking  aicay  of  the  life  of 
a  citizen  ivithoul  legal  trial.1  Under  that  excep 
tion,  at  a  time  when  there  was  no  Constitution 
of  the  United  States,  there  was  no  Louallier 
deprived  of  the  one,  and  put  in  jeopardy  of 
the  other,  by  martial  law."  Id.,  pp.  297,  289. 

But  the  same  distinguished  General  has 
consistently,  throughout  his  whole  life,  main 
tained  the  same  opinions  on  this  subject.  In 
the  month  of  October,  1846,  he  submitted  to 
Secretary  Marcy  a  projct  for  the  purpose  of 
enabling  generals  of  our  armies,  then  in  the 
field  in  Mexico,  to  enforce  martial  laiv  for  the 
protection  of  our  armies  against  lawlessness 
on  the  part  of  the  people  of  that  country,  and 
the  people  against  lawlessness  on  the  part  of 
our  soldiers,  in  cases  not  provided  for  in  our 
Articles  of  War.  In  this  communication, 
among  many  other  things,  he  says: 

"It  will  be  seen  that  I  have  endeavored  to 
place  all  necessary  limitations  on  martial  law. 
1.  By  restricting  it  to  a  foreign  hostile  coun 
try.  2.  To  offenses  enumerated  with  some 
accuracy.  3.  By  assimilating  councils  of  ivar 
to  courts-martial.  4.  By  restricting  punish 
ments  to  the  known  laws  of  some  one  of  the 
States,"  etc. 

And,  having  shown  the  course  usually  pur 
sued  by  British  commanders,  under  like  cir 
cumstances,  he  proceeds  to  say: 

"This  law" — he  was  asking  for  an  act  of 
Congress — "can  have  no  constitutional,  legal,  or 
necessary  existence  within  the  United  States. 
At  home,  even  the  suspension  of  the  writ  of 
habeas  corpits  by  Congress,  could  only  lead  to 
indefinite  incarceration  of  an  individual,  or 
individuals,  who,  if  further  punished  at  all,  could 
only  be  so  through  the  ordinary  or  common  law 
of  the  land."  5  Exec.  Doc.,  30  Congress,  1st 
session.  Doc.  59,  pp.  50,  52. 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


215 


This  projet,  apparently  so  reasonable  and  so 
necessary,  was,  however,  never  adopted  by  the 
administration  of  Mr.  Polk;  arid  we  accord 
ingly  find  the  Secretary  of  War,  about  the 
same  time,  directing  General  Taylor  to  release 
from  confinement,  and  send  out  of  his  lines,  a 
notorious  murderer,  because  the  Articles  of 
War  did  not  then  authorize  his  trial  by  a 
court-martial,  although  he  was  a  soldier.  And 
so  .the  Articles  of  War  remained  until  the 
present  rebellion,  notwithstanding  the  inter 
national  laws  and  usages  of  war  clearly 
clothed  our  generals,  in  the  enemy's  country, 
•with  the  power  requisite  to  punish  such  of 
fenses  by  martial  law.  Grotius,  De  Jure  Belli  ac 
lyaci?,  lib.  3,  cap.  8;  VattePf  Law  of  Nations,  lib. 
3,  cap.  8;  .and  Wheatoris  Elements  of  Interna 
tional  Law,  part  4,  cap.  2. 

Since  the  present  rebellion  began,  Congress 
have  enlarged  the  jurisdiction  of  courts-mar 
tial  over  soldiers,  so  as  to  embrace  such  cases. 
In  the  same  act,  too,  they  have  made  the  pun 
ishments  affixed  to  such  crimes  by  the  laws  of 
the  State  where  they  may  be  committed,  the 
measure,  in  one  respect  at  least,  of  the  pun 
ishments  to  be  inflicted  by  such  courts.  The  act, 
however,  is  limited  in  its  operations  to  soldiers. 
Hence,  I  infer  that  it  was  not  intended  to  extend 
to  citizens;  and  this  upon  the  long  established 
principle,  "  that  affirmatives  in  statutes  that  intro 
duce  new  laws  do  imply  a  negative  of  all  that  is  not 
in  the  purview.1'  Hobarfs  Rep.,  p.  298. 

It  might  readily  be  shown  that,  upon  all  the 
principles  of  construction  and  interpretation 
applicable  to  constitutional  provisions  in  re 
gard  to  the  right  of  trial  by  jury,  that  they 
occupy  a  favored  relation  to  the  other  provi 
sions  of  that  instrument.  In  the  first  place,  it 
stands  among  the  reserved  rights  of  the  peo 
ple.  It  is,  as  it  were,  placed  in  a  Bill  of 
Rights:  and  is  thus  entitled  to  a  favorable,  or 
liberal  construction,  as  in  favor  of  liberty,  and 
against  the  powers  granted,  which,  simply  be 
cause  they  are  encroachments  upon  liberty, 
must  be  strictly  construed.  There  are  no 
rules  better  established  in  our  constitutional 
jurisprudence  than  these.  Besides,  amend 
ments  must  always  prevail  as  against  provi 
sions  conflicting  with  them;  and  the  right  of 
trial  by  jury  is  secured  by  amendments  to  the 
Constitution.  If  they  had  not  been  so  named, 
the  mere  fact  that  they  were  adopted  after  the 
Constitution,  and  by  equal  authority  to  that 
by  which  it  was  adopted,  entitles  them  to  pre 
vail  against  any  provision  conflicting  with 
them  ;  for  as  it  is  not  possible  for  one  Parlia 
ment,  or  Congress,  to  bind  the  hands  of  a  sub 
sequent  one,  so  one  generation  of  the  people 
can  not  bind  the  next,  or  even  itself,  at  a  sub 
sequent  time. 

I  disagree  with  the  opinion  expressed  by 
Mr.  Attorney  General  Gushing,  in  an  opinion 
which  I  have  already  quoted,  in  which  he 
seems  to  hold  that  these  provisions  in  respect 
to  the  right  of  trial  by  jury,  are  of  but  little 
value,  on  account  of  the  very  general  terms 
in  which  they  are  expressed.  He  should  have 
remembered,  however,  that  they  were  adopted 
by  the  framers  of  the  Constitution  from  an 
cient  English  laws,  and  had  received  a  fixed 
and  practical  signification  and  application  for 


ages.  Mr.  Justice  Story  was  not  inclined  to 
regard  them  as  mere  "glittering  generalities;" 
for  he  thus  descants  upon  the  rights  they 
secure: 

"It  seems  hardly  necessary,  in  this  place, 
to  expatinte  on  the  antiquity  or  importance  of 
the  trial  by  jury  in  criminal  cases.  It  was 
from  very  early  times  insisted  on  by  our  ances 
tors,  in  the  parent  country,  as  the  great  bul 
wark  of  their  civil  and  political  liberties;  and 
watched  with  an  unceasing  jealousy  and  so 
licitude.  The  right  constitutes  one  of  the  fun 
damental  articles  of  Magna  Charta,  in  which 
it  is  declared:  '•Nullm  homo  capiatur.  n-«c  im- 
prisonetur,  aut  ezulil,  aut  aliquo  modo  distruatur, 
etc.;  nisi  per  legale  judicium  parium  suorum,  vel 
per  legem  terra;  no  man  shall  be  arrested,  nor 
imprisoned,  nor  banished,  nor  deprived  of  life, 
etc.,  but  by  the  judgment  of  his  peers,  or  by 
the  law  of  the  land.'  The  judgment  of  his 
peers  here  alluded  to,  and  commonly  called,  in 
the  quaint  language  of  former  times,  a  trial 
per  pats,  or  trial  by  the  country,  is  the  trial  by 
a  jury,  who  are  called  the  peers  of  the  party 
accused,  being  of  the  like  condition  and  equal 
ity  in  the  State.  When  our  more  immediate 
ancestors  removed  to  America,  they  brought 
this  great  privilege  with  them,  as  their  birth 
right  and  inheritance,  as  a  part  of  that  ad 
mirable  common  law  which  had  fenced  round 
and  interposed  barriers  on  every  side  against 
the  approaches  of  arbitrary  power.  It  is  now 
incorporated  into  all  our  State  Constitutions 
as  a  fundamental  right,  and  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States  would  have  been  justly  obnoxious  to 
the  most  conclusive  objection,  if  it  had  not  recog 
nized  and  confirmed  it  in  the  most  solemn  terms. 

"  The  great  object  of  a  trial  by  jury  in  crim 
inal  cases  is  to  guard  against  a  spirit  of  op 
pression  and  tyranny  on  the  part  of  rulers; 
and  against  a  spirit  of  violence  and  vindic- 
tiveness  on  the  part  of  the  people.  Indeed,  it 
is  often  more  important  to  guard  against  the 
latter  than  the  former.  The  sympathies  of  all 
mankind  are  enlisted  against  the  revenge  and 
fury  of  a  single  despot,  and  every  attempt 
will  be  made  to  screen  his  victims.  But  how 
difficult  is  it  to  escape  from  the  vengeance  of 
an  indignant  people,  roused  to  hatred  by  un 
founded  calumnies,  or  stimulated  to  cruelty 
by  bitter  political  enmities,  or  unmeasured 
jealousies!  The  appeal  for  safety  can,  under 
such  circumstances,  scarcely  be  made  by  in 
nocence  in  any  other  manner  than  by  the  se 
vere  control  of  courts  of  justice,  and  by  the 
firm  and  impartial  verdict  of  a  jury  sworn  to 
do  right;  and  guided  solely  by  legal  evidence, 
and  a  sense  of  duty.  In  such  a  course  there 
is  a  double  security  against  the  prejudices  of 
judges  who  may  partake  of  the  wishes  and 
opinions  of  the  Government,  and  against  tho 
passions  of  the  multitude,  who  may  demand 
their  victim  with  a  clamorous  precipitation. 
So  long,  indeed,  as  this  palladium  remains  sa 
cred  and  inviolable,  the  liberties  of  a  free  gov 
ernment  can  not  wholly  fall.  But  to  give  it  real 
efficiency,  it  must  be  preserved  in  its  purity 
and  dignity,  and  not  with  a  view  to  slight  in 
conveniences,  or  imaginary  burdens,  be  put 
into  the  hands  of  those  who  are  incapable  of 
estimating  its  worth,  or  are  too  inert,  or  too 


216 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


ignorant,  or  too  imbecile  to  wield  its  potent 
armor.  Mr.  Justice  Blackstone,  with  the 
warmth  and  pride  becoming  an  Englishman, 


the  bench  of  judicial  authority.  The  consti 
tution  of  the  jury  consequently  invests  the 
people,  or  a  class  of  citizens,  with  the  direc- 


living  under  its  blessed  protection,  has  said.-jtion  of  society."     1  Democracy  in  America,  p. 
'  A  celebrated  French  writer,  who  concludes,  |  309. 


that  because  Rome,  Sparta,  and  Carthage  have 
lost  their  liberties,  therefore  those  of  England. 


Again,  he  says : 

"The  jury  is  pre-eminently  a  political  in- 


in  time,  must  perish,  should  Iwve  recollected  [stitution.  It  must  be  regarded  as  one  form  of 
that  Rome,  Sparta,  and  Carthage,  at  the  time  j  the  sovereignty  of  the  people.  When  that  sov- 
their  liberties  were  lost,  were  strangers  to  the  j  ereignty  is  repudiated,  it  must  be  rejected;,  or 
trial  by  jury.'  j  it  must  toe  adapted  to  the  laws  by  which  that 


It  is  observable  thai  the  trial  of  all  crimes 
is  not  only  to  be  by  jury,  but  to  be  held  in  the 
State  where  they  are  committed.  The  object 
of  this  clause  is  to  secure  the  party  accused 
from  being  dragged  to  a  trial  in  some  distant 
State,  away  from  his  friends,  and  witnesses, 
and  neighborhood,  and  thus  to  be  subjected  to 
the  verdict  of  mere  strangers,  who  may  feel 
no  common  sympathy,  or  who  may  even  cher 
ish  animosities  or  prejudices  against  him. 
Besides  this,  a  trial  in  a  distant.  State  or  Ter 
ritory  might  subject  the  party  to  the  most  op 
pressive  expenses,  or,  perhaps,  even  to  the  in 
ability  of  procuring  the  proper  witnesses  to 
establish  his  innocence.  There  is  little  dan 
ger,  indeed,  that  Congress  would  ever  exert 
their  power  in  such  an  oppressive  and  unjus 
tifiable  a  manner.  But,  upon  a  subject  so  vital 
to  the  security  of  the  citizen,  it  was  fit  to  leave 
as  little  as  possible  to  mere  discretion.  By 
the  common  law,  the  trial  of  all  crimes  is  re 
quired  to  be  in  the  county  where  they  are 


sovereignty  is  established.  The  jury  is  that, 
portion  of  the  nation  to  which  the  execution 
of  the  laws  is  intrusted,  as  the  House  of  Par 
liament  constitute  that  part  of  the  nation 
which  makes  the  laws;  and  in  order  that  so 
ciety  may  be  governed  with  consistency  and 
uniformity,  the  list  of  citizens  qualified  to 
serve  on  juries  must  increase  and  diminish 
with  the  list,  of  electors."  Id.,  310. 

He  further  says: 

"The  system  of  the  jury,  as  it  is  under 
stood  in  America,  appears  to  me  to  be  as  di 
rect,  and  as  extreme  a  consequence  of  the 
sovereignty  of  the  people  as  universal  suffrage. 
The  institutions  are  two  instruments  of  equal 
power,  which  contribute  to  the  supremacy  of 
the  majority.  All  the  sovereigns  who  have  chosen 
to  govern  by  their  own  authority,  and  to  direct  society 
instead  of  obeying  its  direction,  have  destroyed  or  en 
feebled  the  institution  of  the  jury.  The  monarchs 
of  the  house  of  Tudor  sent  to  prison  jurors 


who  refused  to  convict,  and  Napoleon  caused 
committed.  Nay,  it  originally  carried  its  them  to  be  returned  by  his  agents."  Id.,  p. 
jealousy  still  further,  and  required  that  the  310. 

How  much  it  is  to  be  regretted  that  any 
American  citizen,  and  especially  one  in  high 
position,  should  allow  himself  to  be  driven  by 
the  terrible  condition  of  the  country,  or  any 
other  consideration,  to  disparage  the  trial  by 
jury  in  criminal  cases;  and,  in  the  very 
teeth  of  the  Constitution  of  his  country,  pub 
licly  express  his  regret  that  the  jury  stands 
in  the  way  of  a  system  of  penal  administra 
tion,  which  may  be  more  certain  to  conform  to 
his  own  private  views  of  justice;  and  to  hold 
men  to  answer  "charges  of  crimes"  not  "well 
defined  by  law."  That  any  cause  should  have 
led  an  American  citizen  to  such  conclusions, 
is,  I  humbly  conceive,  one  of  the  very  worst 
signs  of  these  evil  times.  If  our  country  is  to 
be  successful  in  its  present  struggle,  and  if 
its  liberties  are  destined  to  survive,  the  jury, 
venerable  for  its  antiquity  and  sacred  for  its 


jury  itself  should  come  from  the  vicinage  of 
the  place  where  the  crime  was  alleged  to  be 
committed.  This  was  certainly  a  precaution, 
which,  however  justifiable  in  an  early  and 
barbarous  state  of  society,  is  little  commend 
able  in  its  more  advanced  stages.  It  has  been 
justly  remarked  that,  in  such  cases,  to  sum 
mon  a  jury,  laboring  under  local  prejudices, 
is  laying  a  snare  for  their  consciences,  and 
though  they  should  have  virtue  and  vigor  of 
mind  sufficient  to  keep  them  upright,  the  par 
ties  will  grow  suspicious,  and  indulge  other 
doubts  of  the  impartiality  of  the  trial.  It 
was  doubtless  by  analogy  to  this  rule  of  the 
common  law,  that  all  criminal  trials  arc  re 
quired  to  be  in  the  State  where  committed. 
But  as  crimes  may  be  committed  on  the  high 
Beas,  and  elsewhere,  out  of  the  territorial  ju 
risdiction  of  a  State,  it  was  indispensable 
that,  in  such  cases,  Congress  should  be  enabled 
to  provide  a  place  of  trial."  Story  on  the 
Const.,  $  1778,  1779,  1780,  ct  seq. 

M.  De  Tocqueville,  in  discussing  the  insti 
tution  of  the  jury,  gives  very  great  weight  to 
its  character  as  a  political  institution.  In 
times  like  these,  we  may.  perhaps,  learn  some 
thing  of  the  value  of  what  we  now  seem  about 
to  lose,  even  from  the  words  of  a  foreigner. 
Ho  says: 

"  The  true  sanction  of  political  laws  is  to  be 
found  iu  penal  legislation,  and,  if  that  sanc 
tion  be  wanting,  the  law  will  sooner  or  later 
lose  its  cogency.  He  who  punishes  infractions 
of  the  law,  is,  therefore,  the  real  master  of  society. 
Now,  the  institution  of  the  jury  raises  the 
people  itself,  or,  at  least,  a  class  of  citizens,  to 


uses,  must  go  with  us,  in  all  its  vigor,  through 
the  Red  sea.  in  the  midst  of  which  we  are  now 
journeying.  To  abandon  it  now,  is  to  give  up 
the  contest  for  free  government  in  which  we 
are  engaged.  We  must  not,  therefore,  aban 
don  it  in  these  dark  days,  and  it  will  follow  us 
again  into  the  light,  and  long  continue  to  pro 
tect  and  bless  us  in  the  possession  of  a  manly 
freedom,  in  the  happy  years  to  come. 

I  think  it  has  already  been  sufficiently 
shown,  that  there  is,  in  fact,  no  power  in  the 
reneral  Government,  nor  behind  that,  in  the 
society  which  it  represents,  to  proclaim  martial 
law  throughout  the  whole  country.  It  may, 
perhaps,  liave  a  local  operation,  as  a  mere 
fact,  resulting  from  the  presence  of  hostile 
armies;  but,  in  that  case,  it  will  exist  Avithout 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


217 


a  proclamation  as  well  as  with  it.  Dr.  Leiher, 
whom  I  have  already  quoted,  and  whose  works 
are  of  the  highest  possible  value  on  all  sub 
jects  which  he  touches,  in  General  Ordere!,  No. 
100,  1863,  of  our  War  Department,  fully  sus 
tains  this  view.  He  says,  or  rather  tho  Com 
mander-in-chief,  speaking  his  words,  says: 
"The  presence  of  a  hostile  army  proclaims  its 
martial  laiv."  If,  therefore,  there  be  no  right 
ful  power  in  the  Government  to  proclaim  mar 
tial  laio  over  any  part  of  its  own  territories, 
where  the  fact  is  not  already  established  by 
events,  then  Indiana  is  certainly  not  under 
martial  low  to-day,  and  has  never  yet  been. 

If,  however,  in  the  consideration  of  this 
branch  of  the  subject,  you  should  still  hold 
that  the  Government,  or  any  department  there 
of,  may  declare  martial  law  without  the  pres 
ence  of  the  fact,  then  other  questions  nat 
urally  present  themselves.  Among  these  I 
may  be  permitted  to  ask  the  following: 

Has  the  Government  of  the  United  States, 
or  any  department  thereof,  declared  martial  law 
in  the  State  of  Indiana? 

Who  has  done  it? — the  President,  or  some  of 
his  generals? 

Has  Congress  authorized  it?  Let  us  exam 
ine  and  see  how  the  fact  stands.  Has  that 
body  taken  that  great,  and,  for  themselves,  as 
a  department  of  the  Government,  it  may  be, 
final  step?  Surely  Congress  has  not  turned 
felo  de  se.  On  the  contrary,  they  have  showed 
great  prudence  and  discretion,  as  well  as  re 
gard  for  the  Constitution,  and  our  free  insti 
tutions  existing  under  it;  while,  at  the  same 
time,  they  have  taken  due  care  that  the  Republic 
may  suffer  no  detriment. 

I  can  not  more  pointedly  and  briefly  present 
the  action  of  Congress  on  this  subject  than 
was  done  in  the  case  of  Mr.  Dodd;  and,  there 
fore,  adopt  what  was  then  urged  upon  your 
consideration : 

"By  an  act  approved  July  31,  1864,  (12  Stat. 
at  Large,  p.  284),  conspiracies  are  defined  and 
the  mode  of  punishment  prescribed,  namely: 
by  trial  in  the  circuit  or  district  courts  of  the 
United  States,  of  the  proper  circuit  or  district. 
Can  these  parties  be  tried  before  any  other 
tribunal?  The  defendants  hold  not. 

"By  the  President's  proclamation  of  Sep 
tember  24,  1862,  suspending  the  privilege  of 
the  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  it  was  ordered,  'that 
during  the  existing  insurrection,  and  as  a  nec 
essary  measure  for  suppressing  the  same,  all 
rebels  and  insurgents,  their  aiders  and  abettors 
within  the  United  States,  shall  be  subject  to 
martial  law,  and  liable  to  trial  .and  punishment 
by  court-martial  or  military  commission.' 
Without  .stopping  to  inquire  whether  this 
proclamation  was  authorized;  and,  if  so, 
whether  it  embraced  persons  charged  with 
committing  a  substantive  offense,  within  a 
State  not  in  insurrection,  and  where  the 
United  States  courts  were  in  full  exercise  of 
their  powers,  the  defendants  claim  that  it  has 
been  superseded  by  the  act  of  Congress  of  the 
3d  of  March.  1863,  [12  Stat.  at  Large,  775],  re 
lating  to  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus;  and  by  the 
President's  proclamation  based  thereon,  of 
September  15,  1863. 

"The  first  section  of  this  act  of  1863,   au 


thorizes  the  President  to  suspend  the  writ  of 
habeas  corpus. 

''The  second  requires  the  Secretaries  of 
State  and  War  to  report  to  the  judges  of  the 
United  States  circuit  and  district  courts  the 
names  of  all  persons  held  in  military  custody 
by  order  of  the  President,  in  their  respective 
districts;  and,  if  the  grand  juries  of  the 
proper  districts  fail  to  find  bills,  it  is  made 
the  duty  of  the  judges  to  have  all  such  per 
sons  discharged,  on  taking  the  oath  of  allegi 
ance,  and  giving  bond,  if  required. 

"The  third  section  provides  that  all  persons 
so  held,  and  not  reported,  shall  be  entitled  to 
a  discharge  in  the  same  mariner  as  is  pro 
vided  in  the  second  section,  after  a  failure,  on 
the  part  of  the  proper  grand  jury,  to  indict 
them. 

"Here  are  all  the  sections  of  this  act  which 
bear  on  the  question;  and,  it  will  be  seen, 
that  while  they  contemplate  and  sanction  mil 
itary  arrests,  they  do  not  countenance  or  au 
thorize  military  trials.  On  the  contrary,  they 
fairly  discountenance  them. 

"The  President's  proclamation,  based  on  this 
act,  limits  the  suspension  of  the  habeas  corpus 
to  persons  amenable  to  military  law,  or  to  the 
Rules  and  Articles  of  War.  No  order  is  con 
tained  in  the  proclamation  in  regard  to  trial, 
and  the  inference  is  irresistible,  that  the 
proper  courts  are  left  to  act  under  the  rules 
of  law  upon  that  subject;  and  these  are  too 
well  defined  to  require  comment.  Civil  courts 
try  offenses  against  the  law,  committed  by  cit 
izens — military  courts  try  such  as  are  sub 
ject  to  the  Rules  and  Articles  of  War;  and  the 
defendants  claim  that  they  do  not  fall  within 
that  class." 

I  have  been  able  to  find  no  other  act  of  Con 
gress,  passed  since  the  3d  of  March,  1863, 
which  authorizes  or  countenances  in  any  man 
ner  whatever  the  notion  that  it  has,  at  any 
time,  been  the  intention  of  that  body  to  estab 
lish  martial  law,  or  to  authorize  any  one  else  to 
do  so,  or  even  to  permit  it.  This  act  does,  in 
deed,  authorize  the  suspension  of  the  writ  of 
habeas  corpus,  if  Congress  can  transfer  the  dis 
cretion  conferred  upon  them  by  the  Constitu 
tion,  to  determine  at  what  time,  in  the  progress 
of  an  invasion,  or  rebellion,  the  emergency  re 
quired  has  arisen,  when  the  public  safety  re 
quires  its  suspension.  That  Congress  can  do 
any  such  thing,  I  deny;  but  do  not  choose  to 
stop  here  to  discuss  the  point,  as  it  is  -not  in 
volved  in  this  cause. 

If  we  admit,  for  the  sake  of  argument,  that 
Congress  have  invested  the  President  with  the 
power  both  to  judge  and  to  act..in  the  proper 
emergency;  and  that  he  has,  well  availed  him 
self  of  this  power  by  publishing  his  procla 
mation  of  September  15,  1863,  what  follows? 
Certainly  not,  that  Congress  have  proclaimed, 
or  authorized  him  to  proclaim  martial  law;  but 
have,  on  the  other  hand,  by  a  controlling  irn- 
plicntion,  provided  that  martial  law,  so  far  as 
the  trial  of  a  citizen  is  concerned,  shall  not  be 
tolerated;  but  that  such  citizen  shall,  in  all 
cases,  when  under  military  arrest,  be  turned 
over  to  the  proper  civil  tribunals— the  circuit 
or  district  courts,  of  the  proper  district — A>r 
trial  according  to  law;  or  discharged  either 


218 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


absolutely  or  conditionally,  if  no  bill  of  in 
dictment  be  found  against  him.  And  this  har 
monizes  well  with  what  Colonel  Scott,  in  his 
Military  Dictionary,  lays  down  as  the  conse 
quence  of  a  declaration  or  proclamation  of 


long  exclusively  to  Congress."     Story's  Comm., 
\  1342;  1  Tucker's  Blackstone,  p.  292. 

"  In  this  particular,  as  in  many  o-thers,  the 
Constitution  has  provided  for  a  secondary  in 
cident,  or  a  single  fact,  without  providing  for 


martial  law  within  the  United  States'.    He  says:    the- substance,  or  for  the  general  fact;  just  as 
"Within  the  United  States,  therefore,  the  ef-   when  it  gives  power  to  establish  post-roads, 
feet  of  a  declaration  of  martial  law  would  not   but  says  nothing  of  the  transportation  of  the 


be  to  subject  citizens  to  trial  by  courts-mar 
tial;  but  it  would  involve  simply  the  suspen 
sion  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  under  the 
authority  given  in  the  second  clause  of  section 
nine  of  the  Constitution,  viz.:  'The  privilege 
of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  shall  not  be  sus 
pended,  .unless  when,  in  case  of  rebellion  or 


invasion,  the  public    safety    may    require    it.' 

•X-  #  ••:- 

"The  suspension  of  this  privilege  would 
enable  the  commander  to  incarcerate  all  dan 
gerous  citizens;  but,  when  brought  to  trial, 
the  citizen  would  necessarily  come  before  the 


ordinary  civil  courts  of   the  land.'' 
Dictionary,  tit.  Martial  Law. 


Military 


And  such  would  seem  to  be  the  opinion  of 
Mr.  Attorney  General  Gushing,  who  says: 

"I  say  we  are  without  law  on  the  subject. 

"The  Constitution,  it  is  true,  empowers 
Congress  to  declare  war,  to  raise  and  support 
armies,  to  provide  and  maintain  a  navy,  to 
make  rules  for  the  government  of  the  land  and 
naval  forces,  to  provide  for  calling  forth  the 
militia  to  execute  the  laws  of  the  Union,  sup 
press  insurrections  and  repel  invasions,  and  to 
provide  for  organizing,  arming  and  disciplin 
ing  the  militia,  and  for  governing  such  part 
of  them  as  may  be  employed  in  the  service  of 


mails.  It  does  not  say  that  martial  law  shall 
not  exist,  unless  when  the  public  safety  may 
require  it,  in  case  of  insurrection  or  invasion; 
but  only  that  the  writ  of  -habeas  corpus  shall 
not  be  suspended,  except  in  such  circumstances. 
But,  if  the  emergency  of  insurrection  or  in 
vasion,  involving  the  public  safety,  be  requi 


site  to  justify  the  suspension  of  the  writ  of 
habeas  corpus,  surely  that  emergency  must  be 
not  the  less  an  essential  prerequisite  of  the 
proclamation  of  martial  law,  and  of  its  consti 
tutional  existence. 

"We  have  in  Great  Britain  several  recent 
examples  of  acts  to  give  constitutional  exis 
tence  to  the  fact  of  martial  law.  One  is  the 
act  of  Parliament  of  the  3  and  4  Gco.  4,  ch.  4, 
designed  for  the  more  effectual  suppression  of 
local  disturbances  in  Ireland.  Another  act  of 
that  same  nature,  that  of  57  Geo.  3,  ch.  3,  was 
for  the  case  of  apprehended  insurrection  '  in 
the  metropolis,  and  in  many  other  parts  of 
Great  Britain,'  which  act  was  followed  the 
next  year  by  the  indemnifying  act  of  58  Geo. 
3,  ch.  G.  These  examples  show,  that,  in  the 
opinion  of  the  statesmen  of  that  country,  the 
general-  fact  of  the  existence  of  martial  law,  and 
its  incident,  the  suspension  of  the  writ  of  ha 
beas  corpus,  alike  require  the  exercise  of  the 


the  United  States.     But  none  of  these  powers  I  power   of  the    supreme  legislative    authority 


has  been  exerted  in  the  solution  of  the  present 
question. 

"In  the  amendments  of  the  Constitution, 
among  the  provisions  of  general  right  which 
they  contain,  are  sonic,  the  observance  of  which 


seems  incompatible  with  the  existence  of  mar-  "writ  of  habeas  corpus  'shall  not  be  suspended 


tial  law,  or,  indeed,  any  other  of  the  supposable, 


(1    Blacks.    Comm.,    p.    136,    Coleridge's    note; 
Sawyer1 9  Const.  Law,  p.  424). 

"That  idea  pervades  the  constitutional  or 
ganization  of  the  several  States  of  the  Union. ^ 
Thus,  in  Massachusetts,  it  is  provided  that  the 


by  the  Legislature,  except  upon  the  most 


if  not  necessary  incidents  of  invasion  or  in-   gent  necessity,  and  pressing  occasions,  and  for 
surrection.      But    these    provisions    are    notia    limited   time.'     In   other   States,  while  the 


sufficiently  definite  to  be  of  practical  appli 
cation  to  the  subject-matter. 

"In  the  Constitution  there  is  one  clause  of 
more  apparent  relevancy,  namely,  the  declar 
ation  that  'the  privilege  of  the  writ  of  habeas 
corpus  shall  not  be  suspended,  unless  when, 
in  case  of  rebellion  or  invasion,  the  public 
safety  may  require  it.'  This  negation  of  power 
follows  the  enumeration  of  the  powers  of  Con 
gress,  but  it  is  general  in  its  terms;  it  is  in 
the  section  of  things  denied,  not  only  to  Con 
gress,  but  to  the  Federal  Government  as  a 
government,  and  to  the  States.  I  think  it 
must  be  considered  as  a  negation  reaching  all 
the  functionaries,  legislative  or  executive,  civil 
or  military,  supreme  or  subordinate,  of  the 
Federal  Government:  that  is  to  say,  that  there 
can  be  no  valid  suspension  of  the  writ  of 
habeas  corpus  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
United  States,  unless  when  the  public  safety 
may  require  it,  in  cases  of  rebellion  or  invasion. 
And  the  opinion  is  expressed  by  the  commen 
tators  on  the  Constitution,  that  the  right  to 
suspend  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  and  also  that 
of  judging  when  the  exigency  has  arisen,  be- 


exigency  for  the  suspension  of  the  writ  is 
defined,  as  in  New  York,  the  suspending  au 
thority  is  not  specified.  In  others,  there  is 
express  general  provision,  as  to  the  suspension 
of  laws,  without  specifying  this  writ — the 
general  power  of  suspension  being  confided  to 
the  legislature,  as  in  Maryland,  Virginia  and 
Tennessee.  The  State  of  Pennsylvania  has 
both  provisions  in  its  constitution.  And  it 
may  be  assumed,  as  a  general  doctrine  of  con 
stitutional  jurisprudence  in  all  the  United 
States,  that  the  power  to  suspend  laws,  whether 
those  granting  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  or  any 
other,  is  vested  exclusively  in  the  legislature,  of  the 
particular  Stale. 

"How  intimate  the  relation  is,  or  may  be, 
between  the  proclamation  of  martial  law  and 
the  suspension  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  is 
evinced  by  the  particular  facts  of  the  case  be 
fore  me — it  appearing,  as  well  by  the  report 
of  the  Governor  as  by  that  of  Chief  Justice 
Lander,  that  the  very  object  for  which  martial 
law  was  proclaimed  was  to  prevent  the  use  of 
the  writ  in  behalf  of  certain  persons  held  in 
confinement  by  the  military  authority,  oil  the 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


219 


charge  of  treasonable  intercourse  with  hostile 
Indians.  That,  however,  is  but  one  of  the 
consequences  of  martial  law,  and  by  no  means 
the  largest  or  gravest  of  those  consequences, 
since,  according  to  every  definition  of  martial 
law,  it  suspends,  for  the  time  being,  all  the 
laws  of  the  land,  and  substitutes  in  their  place 
no  law,  that  is,  the  mere  will  of  the  military 
commander. 

"There  may  undoubtedly  be,  and  have  been, 
emergencies  of  necessity,  csipable  of  them 
selves  to  produce,  and,  therefore,  to  justify 
such  suspension  of  law ;  and  involving,  for 
the  time,  the  omnipotence  of  military  power. 
But  such  a  necessity  is  not  in  the  range  of 
mere  legal  questions.  When  martial  law  is 
proclaimed,  under  circumstances  of  assumed 
necessity,  the  proclamation  must  be  regarded  as  the 
statement  of  an  existing  fact,  rather  than  the  legal 
creation  of  that  fact.  In  a  beleaguered  city,  for 
instance,  the  state  of  siege  lawfully  exists, 
because  the  city  is  beleaguered;  and  the  proc 
lamation  of  martial  law,  in  such  case,  is  but 
notice,  and  authentication  of  a  fact,  that  civil 
authority  has  become  suspended,  of  itself,  by 
force  of  circumstances;  and  that,  by  the  same 
force  of  circumstances,  the  military  power  has 
had  devolved  upon  it,  without  having  author 
itatively  assumed,  the  supreme  control  of  af 
fairs,  in  the  care  of  the  public  safety  and  con 
servation.  Such,  it  would  seem,  is  the  true 
explanation  of  the  proclamation  of  martial  law 
at  New  Orleans  by  General  Jackson."  8 
Opinions  Atty s  Gens,  of  U.  S.,  supra. 

Now,  this  whole  opinion  establishes,  I  think, 
beyond  successful  controversy,  three  points, 
namely: 

1.  That  an  act  of  Congress  is  necessary  to  a 
suspension  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus; 

2.  That  the  suspension  of  that  writ  is  em 
braced  in  a  proclamation  of  martial  law  as  one 
of  the  incidents  thereof;  and, 

3.  That,  a  fortiori,  an  act  of  Congress  is  neces 
sary  to  authorize  a  proclamation  of  martial  law. 

We  arc  thus,  again,  on  solid  footing;  for,  in 
all  cases  where  a  proclamation  of  martial  law  is 
necessary,  Congress  must  act — must  authorize 
it  before  it  can  properly  issue.  Hence,  mar 
tial  law  can  only  be  declared  by  act  of  Con 
gress  directly;  or  by  act  of  Congress  con 
ferring  authority  on  some  other  department  or 
officer  of  the  Government  to  make  such  proc 
lamation.  The  measure,  in  either  case,  must 
proceed  from  Congress. 

But  a  brief  examination  of  the  acts  of  Con 
gress,  passed  since  the  commencement  of  the 
current  rebellion,  will  satisfy  you  that  Con 
gress  has  not  interfered  in  this  matter  either 
by  direct  or  indirect  means,  except  as  already 
noticed,  to  deny  any  such  power  to  the  Presi 
dent,  or  those  under  him.  If,  therefore,  mar 
tial  law  must,  in  any  case,  be  brought  in  by  an 
authoritative  declaration,  proclamation  or 
other  public  act,  before  it  can  properly  exist, 
then  no  such  declaration  or  proclamation  has 
yet  been  made,  or  act  done;  and  for  the  best 
of  all  possible  reasons,  namely:  Congress  has 
not  authorized  any  such  declaration  or  proc 
lamation  to  be  made,  or  act  to  be  done,  and  it 
can  not,  on  our  present  hypothesis,  be  done 
without  such  authority. 


I  believe  the  Judge  Advocate  will  find  it  ex 
ceedingly  difficult  to  turn  to  any  act  of  Con 
gress  conferring  any  such  authority.  The  act 
of  the  3d  of  March,  1863,  is  at  war  with  any 
such  authority  ;  for  why  should  Congress  au 
thorize  the  suspension  of  the  writ  of  habeas 
corpus,  if  they  intended  to  confer  the  greater 
power  to  declare  martial  law?  Above  all,  why 
should  they  prescribe  terms  upon  which  mili 
tary  prisoners,  not  of  war,  should  have  a  trial 
in  the  ordinary  courts  of  the  land,  and,  in 
case  of  a  failure  to  indict  them,  should  be  al 
lowed  habeas  corpus  for  their  discharge?  All 
this  is  quite  opposed  to  any  disposition,  on 
the  part  of  Congress,  to  confer  any  such  au 
thority;  and,  indeed,  is  quite  at  war  with  any 
act  done  by  the  President,  before  the  passage 
of  that  act,  either  for  the  suspension  of  the 
writ  of  habeas  corpus,  or  the  establishment  of 
martial  law. 

But,  suppose  that,  although  you  should  hold, 
as  I  conceive  you  must,  that  the  President  can 
not  suspend  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  without 
an  act  of  Congress  authorizing  him  to  do  so, 
you  should  yet  maintain  that  he  can,  without 
any  act  of  Congress,  exercise  the  all-embrac 
ing  power  of  establishing  martial  law  all  over 
the  country,  then  the  question  arises: 

Has  he  established  martial  law? 

We  have  been  told  that  the  President  estab 
lished  martial  law  by  his  proclamation  of  Sep 
tember  24,  1802,  which  has  been  held  up  here 
as  the  solid  basis  of  your  authority  to  sit  in 
judgment  on  the  lives  of  the  citizens  of  Indi 
ana,  who  are  not  in  the  military  or  naval  ser 
vice  of  the  United  States,  and  have  not  been, 
if  ever,  for  many  years.  But  this  proclama 
tion  is  co-extensive  with  the  territories  of 
the  United  States;  and,  if  in  force  any-where, 
it  must  beevery-where  throughout  the  country. 
In  this  view,  it  is  here,  and  suspends  the  civil 
laws  and  institutions  of  this  State;  and  of  all 
other  States  of  the  Union.  Is  such  a  supposi 
tion  consistent  with  facts?  Can  it  be  recon 
ciled  with  the  subsequent  action  of  the  Presi 
dent  himself?  It  is,  on  the  contrary,  di 
rectly  contradicted  by  the  acts  both  of  Con 
gress  and  the  President.  Thus,  the  act  of 
Congress  of  March  3,  1863,  six  months  subse 
quent  to  the  proclamation,  authorizes  the  Pres 
ident  to  suspend  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  but 
provides  for  a  report  of  his  military  prison 
ers,  not  of  war,  to  the  proper  courts  at  every 
term,  and  for  their  trial  therein  if  indicted; 
but,  if  not  indicted,  then  for  their  discharge, 
provided  they  have  been  imprisoned  twenty 
days.  These  provisions  are  wholly  incompat 
ible  with  the  force  and  effect  of  every  part  of 
the  proclamation  of  September  24,  1862;  and 
no  less  with  the  notion  that  martial  law  had  ac 
tually  been  proclaimed  and  was  in  force,  than 
with  the  notion  that  it  should,  in  the  future, 
be  proclaimed,  or  exist  in  future  in  any  place 
where  the  fact  of  war  had  not  suspended  the 
civil  law,  and  closed  the  civil  courts. 

Yet  what  do  we  find?  The  President  ap 
proved  this  act,  and  subsequently  acted  under 
it  as  the  law  of  the  land;  and,  of  course,  as 
the  true  exposition  of  the  Constitution  in  re 
spect  to  his  power  over  the  subjects  it  em 
braced.  It  is  a  plain  expression,  on  the  part 


220 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


of  Congress  and  of  the  President,  that  the 
writ  of  habeas  corpus  can  only  be  suspended  by 
law;  and  that  imprisonment  of  citizens  by  or 
der  of  the  President,  or  his  inferiors,  shall 
hereafter  have  a  limit  entirely  independent  of 
his  will.  Every  circuit  and  district  court, 
within  its  jurisdiction,  is  to  be,  under  this 
act,  a  jail  delivery  to  the  military  prisons  of  all 
persons,  like  the  defendants,  either  by  trial, 
or  discharge  without  trial.  I  ma}-  repeat  here 
the  rule  of  interpretation  applicable  to  stat 
utes  which  bring  in  new  remedies,  namely: 
What  is  affirmed  in  such  acts  of  one  thing;,  is 
denied  of  all  others.  [Hobart,  supra~\.  Then, 
as  the  civil  courts  are,  by  this  act,  expressly 


naval  forces  of  the  United  States  were  put 
into  activity  to  suppress  the  said  insurrection 
and  rebellion; 

"AND  WHEREAS,  The  Congress  of  the  United 
States,  by  an  act  approved  on  the  third  day  ot 
March,  1863,  did  enact  that  during  said  re 
bellion  the  President  of  the  United  States, 
whenever  in  his  judgment  the  public  safety 
may  require  it,  is  authorized  to  suspend  the 
privilege  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  in  any 
case  throughout  the  United  States,  or  any  part. 


thereof; 

AND  WHEREAS, 


The  said  insurrection  and 


rebellion  still  continue,  endangering  the  ex 
istence  of  the    Constitution   and    Government 


given  jurisdiction  of  these  cases,  either  to  j  of  the  United  States; 
try,  or,  if  no  indictment  be  found,  to  discharge  ;  "A\D  WHEREAS,  The  military  forces  of  the 
the  prisoners,  it  follows  that  the  jurisdiction  j  United  States  are  now  actively  engaged  in. 
of  them  is  denied  to  military  courts  or  com-  i  suppressing  the  said  insurrection  and  re 
missions,  bellion  in  various  parts  of  the  States  where 
The  President  accepted  the  act  of  Marcli  3d, 


1863,  as  the  negative  of  his  proclamation  of 
September  24th,  1802.  Otherwise,  why  did  he 
afterward  issue  another  proclamation  to  sus 
pend  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus?  If  the  former 
proclamation  was  valid,  that  writ,  was  already 
suspended;  and  his  second  could  add  nothing  duly  issued  his  proclamation,  wherein  he 
to  the  force  of  the  first.  But  the  first  procla-  j  declared  that  the  privilege  of  the  writ  of  /ur 
ination  contained  a  declaration  of  martial  law.\  bcas  corpus  should  be  suspended  throughout  the 


the  said  rebellion  has  been  successful  in  ob 


structing  the  laws  and  public  authorities, 
especially  in  the  States  of  Virginia  and 
Georgia ; 

""  AND  WHEREAS,  On    the    15th   day    ot"  Sep 
tember  last,  the  President  of  the  United  States 


Now,  if  this  was  valid,  it  carried  along  with 
it,  as  its  inseparable  incident,  the  suspension 
of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus;  and,  if  it  is  still 
in  force,  then  the  act  of  Congress  authorizing 
a  subsequent  suspension  thereof,  and  the  proc 
lamation  to  carry  the  same  into  effect,  issued 
on  the  15th  of  September,  18G3,  both  proceed 
on  a  false  basis;  for  it  is  taken  for  granted  in 
both  these  measures,  that  the  writ  of  habeas 
corpus  was  not,  at  the  date  of  either  of  them, 
suspended,  which  could  not  have  been  the  case, 
had  either  Congress  or  the  President  regarded 
martial  law  as  then  in  force;  for  martial  law,  as 
already  defined,  always  carries  with  it  the 
suspension  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus.  In 
his  proclamation  of  September  15th,  1863,  the 
President  makes  no  allusion  to  martial  law, 
manifestly  intending  to  leave  it  just  where  the 
act  of  Congress  had  left  it.  This  silence  on 
the  subject  in  the  last  proclamation  clearly 
shows  that  the  President,  at  its  date,  regarded 
himself  as  restrained  by  the  act  of  Congress 
to  the  suspension  of  the  writ,  of  habeas  corpus; 
and  did  not  design  to  transcend  the  authority 
thereof,  by  a  declaration  of  martial  law. 

But  there  is  a  still  later  act  of  the  Presi 
dent's,  that,  in  my  opinion,  utterly  overthrows 
all  pretense  that  martial  law  is  now  in  force  in 
the  State  o-f  Indiana.  The  act  to  which  I  refer 
is  the  following  proclamation: 

"WHEREAS,  By  a  proclamation  which  was 
issued  on  the  15th  day  of  April,  1861,  the 
President  of  the  United  States  announced  and 
declared  that  the  laws  of  the  United  States 
had  been  for  some  time  past,  and  then  were, 
opposed,  and  the  execution  thereof  obstructed, 
in  certain  States  therein  mentioned,  by  com 
binations  too  powerful  to  be  suppressed  by  the 
ordinary  course  of  judicial  proceedings,  or  by 
the  powers  vested  in  the  marshals  by  law; 

"AND  AVIIEREAS,  Immediately  n fter  the  issu 
ing  of  the  said  proclamation,  the  land  and 


United  States  in  the  cases  where,  by  the  au 
thority  of  the  President  of  the  United  States, 
military,  naval  and  civil  officers  of  the  United 
States,  or  any  of  them,  hold  persons  under 
their  command  or  in  their  custody,  either  as 
prisoners  of  war,  spies,  or  aiders  and  abettors 
of  the  enemy,  or  officers,  soldiers,  or  seamen, 
enrolled,  or  drafted,  or  mustered,  or  enlisted 
in,  or  belonging  to,  the  land  or  naval  forces 
of  the  United  States,  or  as  deserters  therefrom, 
or  otherwise  amenable  to  military  law,  or  the 
rules  and  articles  of  war,  or  the  rules  or  reg 
ulations  prescribed  for  the  military  or  naval 
services  by  authority  of  the  President  of  the 
United  States,  Or  for  resisting  a  draft,  or  for 
any  other  offense  against  the  military  or  naval 
service; 

"Axo  WHEREAS,  Many  citizens  of  the  State 
of  Kentucky  have  joined  the  forces  of  the  insur 
gents,  and  such  insurgents  have,  on  several 
occasions,  entered  the  said  State  of  Kentucky 
in  large  force,  and  not  without  aid  and  com 
fort  furnished  by  disaffected  and  disloyal 
citizens  of  the  United  States  residing  therein, 
have  not  only  greatly  disturbed  the  public 
peace,  but  have  overborne  the  civil  authorities 
and  made  flagrant,  civil  war,  destroying  prop 
erty  and  life  in  various  parts  of  that  State; 

"A\n  WHEREAS,  It  has  been  made  known  to 
the  President  of  the  United  States  by  the  of 
ficers  commanding  the  national  armies,  that 
combinations  have  been  formed  in  the  State 
of  Kentucky  with  a  purpose  of  inciting  rebel 
forces  to  renew  the  said  operations  of  civil 
war  within  the  said  State,  and  thereby  to  em 
barrass  the  United  States  armies  now  operat 
ing  in  the  said  States  of  Virginia  and  Georgia, 
and  even  to  endanger  their  safety  ; 

"Now,  therefore,  I,  ABRAHAM  LINCOLN,  Pres 
ident  of  the  United  States,  by  virtue  of  the 
authority  vested  in  me  by  the  Constitution  and 
laws,  do  hereby  declare  that,  in  my  judgment 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


221 


the  public  safety  especially  requires  that  the 
suspension  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  so 
proclaimed  in  the  said  proclamation  of  the 
15th  of  September,  1863,  be  made  effectual  and 
be  duly  enforced  in  and  throughout  the  said 
State  of  Kentucky,  and  that  martial  law  be  for  the 
present  established  therein.  I  do,  therefore,  hereby 
require  of  the  military  officers  in  the  said  State 
that  the  privileges  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  be 
effectually  suspended  within  the  said  State, 
according  to  the  aforesaid  proclamation,  and 
that  martial  law  be  established  therein,  to  take  ef 
fect  from  the  date  of  this  proclamation,  the  said 
siif<j>(')ision  and  establishment  of  martial  law  to  con 
tinue  until  this  proclamation  shall  be  revoked  or 
modified,  but  not  beyond  the  period  when  the 
said  rebellion  shall  have  been  suppressed  or 
come  to  an  end.  And  1  do  hereby  require  and 
command,  as  well  all  military  officers  as  all 
civil  officers  and  authorities  existing  or  found 
within  the  said  State  of  Kentucky,  to  take 
notice  of  this  proclamation,  and  to  give  full 
effect  to  the  same. 

"The  martial  law  herein  proclaimed,  and  the 
things  in  that  respect  herein  ordered,  will  not 
be  deemed  or  taken  to  interfere  with  the 
holding  of  lawful  elections,  or  with  the  pro 
ceedings  of  the  constitutional  Legislature  of 
Kentucky,  or  with  the  administration  of  jus 
tice  in  the  courts  of  law  existing  therein,  be 
tween  citizens  of  the  United  States  in  suits  or 
proceedings  which  do  not  affect  the  military 
operations  or  the  constituted  authorities  of  the 
Government  of  the  United  States. 

"In  testimony  whereof,  I  have  hereunto  set 
my  hand,  and  caused  the  seal  of  the  United 
States  to  be  affixed. 

"Done  in  the  City  of  Washington,  this  fifth 
day    of  July,    in    the   year   of  our 

[  L.  s.  ]    Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred 
and   sixty-four,   and   of    the  Inde 
pendence    of   the    United    States    the   eighty- 
ninth.  ABRAHAM  LINCOLN. 

"By  the  President: 

"WILLIAM  H.  SEWARD,  Secretary  of  State.1' 

Now,  I  respectfully  submit:  Why  should 
the  President  deem  it  necessary  to  proclaim 
martial  law  in  Kentucky,  if  martial  law  was  al 
ready  in  force  by  a  standing  valid  proclama 
tion,  not  only  in  that  State,  but  all  over  the 
Union?  The  question  crushes  the  supposition. 
But  the  recitals  of  the  last  proclamation  are 
equally  destructive  of  it;  and  tlie  special  terms 
of  the  declaratory  portion  of  the  instrument 
go  to  the  same  end.  Thus,  it  is  declared  that 
" martial  law  be,  for  the  present,  established 
therein" — that  is,  in  the  State  of  Kentucky. 
But,  according  to  the  theory  of  the  Judge  Ad 
vocate,  martial  law  had  already  been  estab 
lished  therein  two  years  almost,  prior  to  this 
proclamation;  and  in  every  other  State  of  the 
Union.  The  President  goes  still  further  to 
overthrow  the  theory  on  which  alone  you  can 
entertain  jurisdiction  of  this  cause;  for  he 
says,  that  the  martial  law  "established :?  in 
Kentucky,  by  that  proclamation,  shall  "  take 
effect  from  the  date  thereof,  namely  :  the  5th 
of  July,  18G4.  What  nonsense  is  this  procla 
mation  if  the  Judge  Advocate  is  right  in  his 
assumption,  that  the  proclamation  of  Septem 
ber  24th,  1862,  had  already  established  martial 


law  throughout  the  Union?  If  the  President, 
on  the  other  hand,  is  right,  what  nonsense  is 
the  assumption,  that  martial  law  is  in  force  in 
this  State?  The  President  had  reasons  for 
his  discrimination  against  Kentucky ;  for  he 
recites  them.  But  it  is  quite  unnecessary  to 
go  into  them.  That  he  did  discriminate  against 
her,  is  enough  to  answer  my  purpose;  and  to 
place  Indiana  before  you  in  a  different  condi 
tion  from  that  which  she  occupies  in  relation 
to  martial  law.  Indiana  is  not  yet  touched 
with  the  curse  of  martial  law.  Kentucky  is. 
I  recur  to  the  old  rule  of  construction,  and 
ask  you  to  apply  it  to  this  proclamation.  The 
expression  of  one  excludes  the  rest — of  Kentucky, 
Indiana. 

Then,  there  is  no  existence  of  martial  law  in 
Indiana  ;  for  I  will  not  enter  again  upon  the 
question,  whether  the  order  convening  this 
Commission,  and  the  other  ordering  the  ac 
cused  before  it  for  trial,  establish  martial  law. 
It  was  not  convened  until  these  men  were  im 
prisoned  for  the  offenses  for  which  they  are 
now  on  trial.  These  offenses  must,  of  course, 
have  been  committed,  if  ever,  before  they  were 
arrested.  Then,  on  this  hypothesis,  you  are 
convened  to  try  them  for  offenses  against  mar 
tial  law,  which  had  not  been  proclaimed,  and 
did  not  exist  until  after  their  arrest! 

Suppose,  however,  that  there  has,  at  any 
time,  existed  an  intention,  on  the  part  of  the 
President,  or  of  the  General  commanding  this 
district,  to  declare  martial  law,  what  have  they, 
or  either  of  them,  done,  to  give  vitality  to 
such  intention,  or  to  establish  it  as  a  practical 
measure  of  public  administration?  What 
rules  have  they  laid  down  to.  govern  your  ac 
tion  in  its  application  ?  What  crimes  have 
they  said  shall  be  punished  by  it?  And  how 
shall  they  be  punished  ? 

No  general  in  the  world  in  the  present  age, 
•,  indeed,  in  any  age,  since  the  dawn  of  civ 
ilization,  has  ever  yet  thought  of  establishing 
a  martial  law,  the  penalties  whereof  should  be 
confined  to  his  own  breast,  and  that  of  his 
judges,  until  the  moment  thejr  should  fall  with 
ruin  and  destruction  upon  its  miserable  sub 
jects.  God  forbid  that  we  should  live  to  "see 
such  a  system  put  into  operation  here!  All 
writers  on  the  subject  agree  that  there  must 
alwaj's  be  some  notification  of  what  the  com 
manding  general  intends  may  be  done,  and 
what  not  done,  by  the  people  under  his  sway, 
when  he  proclaims  martial  law.  But  has  any 
such  notification  gone  before  these  proceed 
ings?  Truly,  I  should  like  to  know  where  we 
are,  and  what  we  are  about.  Who  has  de 
fined  the  offenses  you  are  to  punish?  What 
is  to  be  the  rule  and  measure  of  your  punish 
ments  ?  You  are  to  select,  I  suppose,  defini 
tions  and  penalties  at  pleasure,  from  the 
boundless  range  of  unlimited  power;  for,  if 
martial  law  has  been  proclaimed,  and  is  in  force, 
ill  the  laws  of  the  land  are  suspended  as  to 
the  accused,  and  to  you,  and  to  all.  You  are 
under  no  obligation  to  go  to  them,  either  for 
definitions  or  penalties,  unless  they  have  been 
adopted  by  the  military  power.  But  that  power 
has  adopted  nothing,  ordained  nothing,  defined 
nothing;  in  a  word,  has  given  us  no  definitions 
of  offenses,  and  no  measures  of  punishment. 


222 


TREASON    TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


It  was  not  thus  that  Wellington  adminis 
tered  martial  law;  for  he  declares  that  the  com 
manding  general  is — mark  the  words — "bound 
to  lay  down  distinctly  the  rules,  and  regulations, 
and  limits,  according  to  which  his  will" — 
which  is  martial  law — "is  to  be  carried  out." 
Hough's  Precedents  in  Mil.  Law,  p.  514. 

And  so  our  own  illustrious  military  chief 
tain,  Lieutenant  General  Scott,  when  he  ^pro 
claimed  martial  law  in  Mexico,  and  enforced  it, 
prescribed  rules  for  its  administration.  Let 
me  show  you  how  h&  proceeded  in  the  matter. 
He  did  not  surprise  the  people  of  Mexico, 
though  they  were  aliens  and  enemies,  by  an 
nouncing  the  advent  of  martial  laiv,  in  the  first 
instance,  by  arrests  and  trials.  On  the  con- 
ti-ary,  he  published  a  general  order,  in  which, 
among  other  things,  he  said: 

"1.  It  is  still  to  be  apprehended  that  many 
grave  offenses  not  provided  for  in  the  act  of 
Congress  'establishing  rules  and  articles  for 
the  government  of  the  armies  of  the  Unite'd 
States,'  approved  April  10,  1806,  may  be  again 
committed — by,  or  upon,  individuals  of  those 
armies,  in  Mexico,  pending  the  existing  war 
between  the  two  republics.  Allusion  is  here 
made  to  oifenses,  any  one  of  which,  if  com 
mitted  within  the  United  States  or  their  or 
ganized  Territories,  would,  of  course,  be  tried 
and  severely  punished  by  the  ordinary  civil 
courts  of  the  land. 

"2.  Assassination,  murder,  poisoning,  rape, 
or  the  attempt  to  commit  either;  malicious 
stabbing  or  maiming;  malicious  assault  and 
battery;  robbery;  theft;  the  wanton  desecra 
tion  of  churches,  cemeteries,  or  other  religious 
edifices  and  fixtures;  the  interruption  of  re 
ligious  ceremonies;  and  the  destruction,  except 
by  order  of  a  superior  officer,  of  public  or 
private  property,  are  such  offenses." 

Then,  after  going  on  and  reciting  the  absence 
of  any  provision  for  the  government  of  an 
army  and  people  situated,  as  were  the  army 
of  the  United  States  and  the  people  of  Mexico, 
to  each  other,  in  our  military  code;  and  the 
necessity  of  such  provision,  and  that  it  was 
found  in  martial  law  as  a  matter  of  necessity, 
he  proceeded  to  order: 

"8.  From  the  same  supreme  necessity  mar 
tial  law  is  hereby  declared  as  a  supplementary 
code,  in  and  about  all  cities,  towns,  camps, 
posts,  hospitals,  and  other  places,  which  may 
be  occupied  by  any  part  of  the  forces  of  the 
United  States  in  Mexico,  and  in  and  about  all 
columns,  escorts,  convoys,  guards  and  detach 
ments  of  the  said  forces,  while  engaged  in 
prosecuting  the  existing  war  in  and  against 
the  said  republic,  and  while  remaining  within 
the  same. 

"9.  Accordingly,  every  crime  enumerated 
in  paragraph  No.  2  above,  whether  committed — 
1.  By  an  inhabitant  of  Mexico,  sojourner  or 
traveler  therein,  upon  the  person  or  prop 
erty  of  any  individual  of  the  United  States 
forces,  retainer,  or  follower  of  the  same.  2. 
By  any  individual  of  the  said  forces,  retainer 
or  follower  of  the  same,  upon  the  person  or 
property  of  any  inhabitant  of  Mexico,  so 
journer  or  traveler  therein;  or,  3.  By  any 
individual  of  the  said  forces,  retainer  or  fol 
lower  of  the  same,  upon  the  person  or  prop 


erty  of  any  other  individual  of  the  said  forces, 
retainer  or  follower  of  the  same,  shall  be 
duly  tried  and  punished  under  the  said  sup 
plementary  code. 

"10.  For  this  purpose,  it  is  ordered  that  all 
offenders  in  the  matters  aforesaid  shall  be 
promptly  seized,  confined,  and  reported  for 
trial,  before  military  commissions,  to  be  duly  ap 
pointed,  as  follows: 

"11.  Every  military  commission,  under  this 
order,  will  be  appointed,  governed  and  lim 
ited,  as  nearly  as  practicable,  as  prescribed 
by  the  65th,  66th,  67th  and  97th  of  the  said 
Rules  and  Articles  of  War,  and  the  proceed 
ings  of  such  commissions  will  be  duly  recorded 
in  writing,  reviewed,  revised,  disapproved  or 
approved,  and  the  sentences  executed;  all,  as 
near  as  may  be,  as  in  the  cases  of  the  proceed 
ings  and  sentences  of  courts-martial;  pro 
vided,  that  no  military  commission  shall  try 
any  case  clearly  cognizable  by  any  courts- 
martial;  and  provided,  also,  that  no  sentence 
of  a  military  commission  shall  be  put  in  ex 
ecution  against  any  individual  belonging  to 
this  army,  which  may  not  be,  according  to  the 
nature  and  degree  of  the  offense,  as  estab 
lished  by  evidence,  in  conformity  with  known 
punishments,  in  like  cases,  in  some  one  of  the 
States  of  the  United  States  of  America.'' 

The  order  covers  many  more  topics,  and 
presents  a  concise  but  masterly  system  for 
the  administration  of  martial  law,  well  worthy 
of  the  consideration  of  those  who  may  be 
placed  under  a  similar  necessity  to  that  which 
called  it  forth.  It  is  manifestly  the  same 
which,  nearly  a  year  before  its  date,  had  been 
presented  to  the  Secretary  of  War,  and  which, 
for  some  reason  or  other,  that  functionary  had 
rejected,  as  I  have  already  shown.  The  whole 
order  will  be  found  in  Scott's  Mil.  Die.,  art. 
Martial  Law,  p.  382. 

Now,  this  order  made  all  plain  both  for  the 
army  and  the  people;  and,  indeed,  for  the 
commissions  sitting  under  it.  There  was  cer 
tainty  as  to  the  crimes  punishable  ;  and,  as 
far  as  practicable,  as  to  the  penalties  to  be  in 
flicted.  There  could  be  no  great  surprises  in 
either.  But  how  is  it  here,  to-day?  Are  we 
not  left  quite  out  at  sea?  And  are  we  not  thus 
left  without  compass,  or  chart,  or  guidin^  star  ? 
If  such  things  be  permitted,  where  will  they 
end?  I  will  not  pause  to  picture  the  wreck  that 
surely  awaits  us,  if  we  allow  ourselves  thus  to 
drift  on,  over  the  pathless  ocean  that  lies  before 
us.  I  have  no  heart  to  think  of  it. 

You  will  not,  therefore,  entertain  jurisdic 
tion  of  this  cause.  I  am  sure  you  will  not; 
for  I  can  not  see  where  such  jurisdiction  can 
begin,  on  what  principles  it  can  rest,  or  how  it 
can  ba  justified.  You  will  not,  I  beg  leave  to 
repeat,  entertain  jurisdiction,  because — 

1.  Such  a  jurisdiction  is    at  war  with  the 
principles  of  constitutional  liberty  as  derived 
by  us  from  Great  Britain,  and  embodied  in  the 
Federal  Constitution ; 

2.  Such  a  jurisdiction  is  at  war  with  all  the 
liberal  principles  of    the    good   old    laws   of 
Father-land,    which    our     ancestors    brought 
over  with  them,  as  their  best  birthright,  to  the 
wilds  of  America; 

3.  Such  a  jurisdiction  is  at  war  with  all  the 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


223 


inspiring  facts  of  our  early  history;  and  ren 
ders  worse  than  useless  the  noble  examples  of 
the  men  of  1776; 

4.  Such  a  jurisdiction  is  at  war  with  the 
very  nature  of  a  limited  constitutional  gov 
ernment;  and  strikes  it  dead  as  soon  as  we 
permit  it  to  cross  our  national  threshold; 

5.  Such  a  jurisdiction  nullifies  the  acts  of 
Congress  as  well  as  the  Constitution ; 

(j.  Such  a  jurisdiction,  in  Indiana,  is  at.  war 
with  the  proclamations  of  the  President;  and 
would  make  him  the  author  of  the  most  ab 
surd  and  monstrous  folly,  as  well  as  of  the 
grossest,  injustice; 

7.  Such  a  jurisdiction  outrages  the  facts  of 
our  condition — our  courts,  both  Federal  and 
State,  being  open — and  the  laws  of  the  land 
having  therein  free  course  and  full  power. 

In  order  to  sustain  such  a  jurisdiction,  you 
must  take  the  responsibility;  for  the  General 
commanding  has  issued  no  order  taking  it 
upon  himself;  and  the  Presillent  is  still  more 
distant  and  disinclined  to  assume  it.  Why 
should  you  volunteer  to  do  this  thing?  And 
why  should  you  now  take  a  step  that  may,  in 
the  future,  be  referred  to  as  a  precedent  for 
the  abolition  of  our  liberties? 


Under  the  administration  of  good  honest 
men,  almost  any  thing  evil,  in  the  way  of  pre 
cedent,  may  remain  harmless.  They  will  not 
use  it;  or,  if  they  do,  suffer  it  to  die  with  the 
evil  exigency  that  called  it  forth.  But  if  you 
now  go  on  with  this  business,  may  there  not 
come  a  time  when  the  land  shall  mourn  for  its 
lost  freedom — lost  through  the  evil  example 
of  this  hour?  Then  shall  our  children  curse 
the  evil  day  in  which  the  bad  precedent — a 
fatal  departure  from  law  and  right, — was  left 
by  us  for  their  ruin. 

Mr.  President  and  gentlemen,  I  have  done. 
I  know  you  have  each  defended  our  common 
country  in  the  field;  and,  had  it  been  your  lot, 
would  have  cheerfully  and  nobly  died  to  pre 
serve  its  Liberty  and  Constitution  from  over 
throw  or  harm.  To-day,  you  have  a  greater 
duty  to  perform — a  far  more  difficult  one  also. 
Perform  it  according  to  the  Constitution  and 
laws — according  to  justice  and  good  con 
science,  as  I  trust  you  will,  and  posterity, 
more  indebted  to  this  day's  work  than  to  all  the 
military  achievements  of  the  war  in  which 
we  are  now  engaged,  will  rise  up  and  call  you 
blessed. 


ARGUMENT  OF  I.  M.  RAY,  ESQ. 


Mr.  President  and  Gentlemen  of  the  Commission  : 

In  discharging  this  last  delicate  and  re 
sponsible  duty  to  clients,  I  avail  myself  of 
the  occasion  to  tender  my  acknowledgment 
to  the  Court  and  the  Judge  Advocate  for  the 
courtesy  and  kindness  toward  myself  and 
clients,  which  we  have  uniformly  enjoyed  at 
your  hands,  during  these  long  and  otherwise 
painful  trials.  From  day  to  dmy  I  have  met 
the  Court  with  increased  pleasure,  and  have 
only  to  regret  that  our  mutual  duties  may  end 
with  the  crisis  in  the  fate  of  each  defendant, 
which  will  precipitate  him  into  woe  and  mise 
ry,  or  send  him  forth  to  the  world  again,  "re 
deemed,  regenerated,  and  disinthrnlled."  It 
is  proper,  too,  that  I  should  say  to  the  Court, 
to  my  associate  counsel,  and  to  our  clients, 
that  the  exhaustive  discussion  of  the  question 
of  jurisdiction  committed  to  the  hands  of  our 
Brother  Gordon,  leaves  nothing  for  me  to  say 
upon  that  subject.  Learning  and  labor  in  his 
hands  have  achieved  a  splendid  triumph.  It 
is  also  due  that  I  should  say  to  Brother  Cof- 
froth,  that  I  am  indebted  to  him  for  the  very 
forcible  and  learned  argument  with  which  he 
has  favored  us  on  certain  points  which,  for 
that  reason,  I  fail  to  notice,  and  I  here  apprise 
him  and  -the  Court,  that  I  appropriate  his 
learning  and  his  logic,  on  these  points,  to  the 
benefit  of  Mr.  Humphreys  and  Colonel  Bowles, 
when  they  are  applicable.  The  question  of 
jurisdiction  is  of  common  interest  to  all  the 
accused.  The  question  whether  the  secret 
order  is,  per  se,  a  conspiracy,  is  likewise  of 
common  interest,  but  of  greater  interest  to 
some  than  to  others.  I  will  consider  it  at 
some  length.  The  charges  and  specifications 
are  of  common  interest  also,  and  I  will  briefly 
consider  them.  The  evidence  being  individual, 
in  the  main,  I  shall  only  consider  it  in  its  re 
lations  to  Mr.  Humphreys  and  Colonel  Bowles. 
But  in  all  that  I  may  say  upon  the  charges  and 
specifications,  it  must  be  understood,  that  only 
two  of  the  charges  are  embraced  in  the  terms 
of  the  President's  Proclamation,  declaring  mar 
tial  law — upon  which  alone  the  Judge  Advo 
cate  predicates  the  jurisdiction  of  this  Court. 
If,  then,  this  Court  only  has  jurisdiction  to 
try  civilians  by  virtue  of  the  existence  of 
martial  law,  established  by  that  proclama 
tion,  and  that  proclamation  enumerates  only 
two  offenses,  subject  to  trial  by  military  com 
mission,  I  might,  it  seems  to  me,  safely  leave 
the  other  three  charges,  with  all  the  evidence 
touching  them,  to  the  candor  of  the  Judge 
Advocate,  for  dismissal.  The  two  offenses 
covered  by  the  proclamation,  are — 1st.  Incit 
ing  insurrection.  2d.  Giving  aid  and  comfort 
to  rebels.  These,  according  to  the  proclama 
tion,  may  be  tried  by  military  commission, 
nnd  none  others. 


Whatever  may  be  the  fate  of  the  two  unfor 
tunate  gentlemen,  for  whom  I  shall  speak,  I 
shall  utter  no  word  whose  literal  meaning, 
even,  on  the  one  hand,  would  tend  to  subvert 
the  fabric  of  Government,  nor  on  the  other  to 
sanction  the  slavish  abandonment  of  the  priv 
ileges  of  free,  legal  controversy.  Every  word 
that  I  shall  utter,  shall  commend  the  Consti 
tution  and  Laws  of  my  country  to  the  rever 
ence  and  obedience,  not  only  of  this  tribunal, 
but  of  all  my  misguided  countrymen,  Avhose 
credulity,  fears  and  passions  have  placed 
them  in  a  false  position  toward  that  Govern 
ment,  whose  existence  has  been  so  causelessly 
imperiled  by  the  conspiracies  of  traitors,  and 
the  storms  of  civil  war.  A  gigantic  civil  war 
rages  in  our  once  proud  and  happy  land — 
great  armies  are  raised,  organized,  fight,  and 
I  perish,  to  maintain  the  great  political  neces- 
I  sity  of  one  flag  and  one  nationality — and 
whoever  strikes  an  open  blow  for  the  rebel 
lion  in  the  South,  or  a  secret  one  in  the  North, 
is  an  enemy  of  his  country,  in  whom  patriot 
ism  is  dead,  and  is  liable  to  be  crushed  by  the 
iron  hand  of  that  Government,  whose  cause  he 
has  betrayed,  and  whose  allegiance  he  has 
forsworn.  The  Northern  people  have  risen 
to  a  sublime  elevation  of  patriotism,  and  have 
declared  that  this  Government,  in  its  whole 
territorial  jurisdiction  and  integrity,  shall 
stand,  and  have  pledged  and  dedicated  the 
resources  of  the  nation  to  the  sacred  work — 
all  secret  organizations  have  crumbled,  and 
all  factious  opposition  has  fallen,  and  a  united 
North  will  spring  from  the  field  of  the  late 
political  conflict.  All  political  rancor — all 
partisan  clamor — all  jealous  intolerance  of 
opinion — all  governmental  proscription  for 
past  differences,  should  cease. 

While  it  may  be  true,  in  a  very  general 
sense,  as  has  often  been  said,  that,  in  refer 
ence  to  the  struggle  between  the  Government 
and  the  Rebellion,  the  people  are  all  patriots 
or  all  traitors — yet  in  an  exact,  literal,  and 
definite  sense,  it  is  wholly  deceptive,  delu 
sive  and  false — an  ad  captandum  proposition, 
adapted  to  the  loose  purposes  of  politics,  but 
dangerous  and  inadmissible  for  all  judicial 
purposes.  Honest  differences  of  opinion, 
based  on  high  and  unselfish  considerations  of 
the  public  weal,  furnish  no  grounds  for  such 
a  classification  of  our  citizens.  Whoever 
assumes  to  himself,  or  to  his  class,  all  the  pat 
riotism  and  loyalty  of  the  country  on  no  bet 
ter  grounds  than  some  abstract  theories  of 
politics,  is  a  sad  victim  of  self-delusion  ;  and 
whoever  pronounces  the  guilt  of  a  political 
opponent  on  such  grounds,  wanders  in  the 
maze  and  twilight  of  lost  principles  and  for- 
sake7i  landmarks. 

In   addressing  myself,  therefore,  to  gentle- 

224 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


225 


men  who  arc  not  only  jealous  of  their  per 
sonal  honor  and  judicial  rectitude,  but  the 
sworn  champions  of  the  National  cause,  and 
zealous  for  the  perpetuity  of  the  Government, 
I  feel  all  the  more  confident  in  urging  certain 
great  principles  of  English  and  American  jur 
isprudence,  not  only  essential  to  the  safety  of 
our  clients,  but  absolutely  necessary  to  the 
establishment  and  existence  of  that  Govern 
ment  whose  integrity  they  are  accused  of 
having  conspired  against. 

Before  attempting  to  analyze  the  testimony, 
I  beg  permission  to  offer  some  observations  on 
the  character  and  essential  nature  of  this 
secret  organization,  called  the  "American 
Knights,"  or  "  Sons  of  Liberty."  I  am  per 
suaded  that  most  of  the  points  that  I  shall  see 
proper  to  make  have  not  escaped,  in  the  pro 
gress  of  the  cause,  the  scrutiny  of  any  mem 
ber  of  this  Court.  What  is  the  original,  true 
character  of  the  order,  as  fixed  by  the  printed 
work  of  the  order,  and  as  understood  by  the 
honest  masses  of  its  members,  when  divested 
of  all  extraneous  and  local  absurdities  with 
which  ignorance  and  passion  have  invested  it 
on  the  one  hand,  and  of  the  meditated  crimes 
with  which  ambition  and  disloyalty  in  a  few 
military  leaders  have  blasted  it  on  the  other? 
After  the  question  of  jurisdiction,  there  is  no 
other  of  such  special  gravity,  because  upon 
its  solution  may  depend  the  guilt  or  innocence 
of  several  defendants.  Although  the  first 
charge  of  the  accusation  against  all  the  de 
fendants  is  based  on  the  assumption  that  the 
order  is.  per  se,  a  conspiracy,  yet  if  there  were 
nothing  but  the  written  work  of  the  order, 
which  is  fully  before  the  Court,  and  the  un 
derstanding  of  the  purposes  and  objects  of  the 
order  by  its  members — I  hazard  nothing  in 
saying  to  this  Court,  that  the  charges  would 
fall.  Or  to  put  the  question  in  a  more  strik 
ing  shape,  permit  me  to  ask,  whether  an  order, 
innocent  at  first  blush,  and  into  which  a  half 
million  of  men  have  innocently  gone,  and 
from  whom  all  knowledge  of  an  evil  purpose 
is  studiously  withheld,  and  confined  to  the 
breasts  of  the  few,  can  be  a  treasonable  con 
spiracy  as  to  any  but  the  guilty  few  ?  The 
intelligence  of  the  whole  world  will  answer 
no  !  So  must  this  Court,  in  justice  to  itself.  I 
do  not  speak  of  the  mummery  of  its  inductions, 
the  blasphemy  of  its  invocations,  nor  the 
solemn  mockery  of  its  charges,  but  of  the 
obligations  assumed  by  its  initiates,  and  the 
lessons  in  the  three  Temple  Degrees.  It  is 
with  unwavering  confidence  that  I  invite  the 
scrutiny  of  each  member  of  this  Court  to  the 
obligations  and  the  lessons  of  the  order  in  In 
diana,  as  found  in  the  printed  works  adduced 
by  the  Government  and  now  before  the  Court. 
I  appeal  from  that  premature  judgment  of  a 
partisan  press,  fulminated  in  the  blindness 
and  fury  of  a  political  campaign,  to  the  calm, 
unimpassioned  judgment  of  honorable,  dis 
criminating  and  critical  minds — nay,  I  might 
even  appeal  to  the  ignorance  and  prejudice  of 
zealots  arid  fanatics  for  a  triumphant  vindica 
tion  of  the  printed  obligations  and  lessons  of 
this  order,  from  all  charges  of  conspiracy,  dis 
loyalty,  or  treason — and  as  I  challenge  English 
and  American  judicial  history,  civil  and  mili- 
15 


tary,  barbarous  and  civilized,  for  a  precedent 
to  justify  such  a  forced,  unnatural  interpreta 
tion,  to  make  constructive  conspiracy  and 
treason  from  a  printed  work  which  inculcates 
nothing  worse  than  bad  politics — as  I  chal 
lenge  the  liberal  and  enlightened  spirit  of  this 
age  of  toleration  in  politics  and  religion,  to 
find  cause  of  treasonable  accusation  against 
these  defendants,  in  the  rituals  and  printed 
work  of  the  order,  without  a  shameless  aban 
donment  of  the  cause  of  free  thought,  speech, 
and  press,  and  a  return  to  a  gloomy  and  fero 
cious  period,  when  to  hate  was  to  accuse,  and 
to  accuse  was  to  convict — so  I  challenge  the 
judicial  records  of  our  own  wise  and  benefi 
cent  Government,  whose  tribunals  administer 
her  laws  according  to  established  rules  and 
forms,  and  in  the  spirit  of  magnanimity, 
mercy,  and  justice,  to  furnish  an  example  of 
such  obligations,  such  lessons,  and  such  a 
secret  association  being  held,  per  se,  a  treason 
able  conspiracy.  The  Vestibule,  or  Neophyte 
lessons  and  obligations  avow  nothing  but  the 
most  common-place  platitudes,  in  morals  and 
politics,  while  the  obligations  and  lessons  of 
the  Temple  Degrees  are  but  an  embodiment 
and  amplification  of  the  Virginia  and  Ken 
tucky  Resolutions  of  1798-9,  to  which  the 
Democratic  statesmen  and  masses  have  been 
committed  by  periodical  conventions,  from  the 
days  of  Jefferson  and  Madison  to  the  present 
hour — all  parties,  in  fact,  have  at  times  cub- 
scribed  to  the  orthodoxy  of  these  Resolutions, 
with  qualifications  of  interpretation.  What 
is  the  true  interpretation  of  these  Resolutions 
can  not  be  gathered  from  the  repositories  of 
angry  debate,  but  is  now  undergoing  a-  bloody 
and  final  solution  by  the  arbitrament  of  the 
sword.  I  have  no  hesitation  in  saying  that 
the  construction  of  these  Resolutions,  which 
is  apparently  maintained  by  the  order,  is 
erroneous  and  mischievous,  and  that  it  has 
been  in  the  baleful  light  of  a  less  equivocal 
construction,  that  Southern  aristocracy  and 
Southern  ambition  have  traveled,  by  a  few 
short  steps,  from  the  base  of  a  mere  logical 
abstraction  to  a  practical  assertion  of  peacea 
ble  State  secession,  and  finally  to  an  armed 
struggle  for  Confederate  independence  and 
the  overthrow  of  Federal  authority,  and  pos 
sibly  the  overthrow  of  Republican  liberty 
itself.  With  these  fruits  before  me,  I  can  not 
ask  this  Court  to  indorse  State  sovereignty 
in  the  sense  of  this  mischievous  interpreta 
tion — but  I  do  for  myself  entreat,  and  for  my 
clients  demand  of  the  Court,  that  they  shall 
not  be  adjudged  conspirators  and  traitors 
for  holding  an  admitted  abstract  heresy  in 
religion,  politics,  or  constitutional  law,  be 
cause  the  precedent  would  be  more  perni 
cious  and  dangerous  than  the  heresy — for  the 
standard  of  orthodoxy  and  the  oracles  of 
death,  which  revolution  throws  into  the  places 
of  power  to-day,  may  tremble  and  quiver  as 
the  reed,  and  be  washed  away  along  with  their 
red  calendar  of  doomed  victims,  by  the  revo 
lutionary  move  of  to-morrow.  What  I  ask. 
in  a  word,  is,  that  these  defendants  shall 
not  be  hunted  as  felons  for  pledging  their 
faith  to  abstract  doctrines,  which,  for  sev 
enty-five  years,  have  furnished  tne  press,  the 


226 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


legislative  halls,  the  court,  the  colleges,  the 
pulpits,  with  a  profound  theme  of  legitimate 
debate.  It  never  has  been,  and  never  can  be, 
the  subject  of  governmental  interference  this 
side  of  the  point  where  absolutism  begins  and 
liberty  ends.  This  Court  will  not  forget  that 
the  National  Democratic  Convention  that  con 
vened  in  Cincinnati,  in  1856,  indorsed  as  a 
cardinal  article  of  their  creed  the  Resolutions 
of  1798-9 — but  in  that  undefined  sense  which 
committed  the  party  to  no  given  construc 
tion — still  I  never  heard  that  the  party  was 
thereb}'  committed  to  the  cause  of  treason  and 
rebellion.  Some  years  ago,  the  advocates  of 
Stale  rights,  in  the  worst  sense  of  these  Reso 
lutions,  held  State  rights  conventions  at 
Nashville  and  Charleston — the  country  was 
generally  shocked  at  the  sentiments  they 
uttered,  but  they  were  not  met  by  indictment, 
but  by  argument  and  rebuke.  Startling 
utterances  came  from  the  Buffalo,  Cleveland, 
and  Boston  convocations  of  anti-slavery 
Radicals — they  were  not  answered  by  arrest, 
nor  punished  by  bastiles.  Societies  were 
formed  to  promote  the  growth  and  dissemina 
tion  of  what  conservatism  pronounced  rank 
heresy,  fraught  with  discord  and  death ;  yet 
these  agitators  were  never  supposed  to  be 
amenable  to  the  law  of  conspiracy  and  trea 
son.  But  one  political  revolution  after 
another  has  sanctified  their  doctrines,  and 
their  advocates  now  hold  the  power,  dispense 
the  honors,  and  move  the  armies  of  this  great, 
but  distracted  country.  Once  their  princi 
ples  were  condemned,  but  not  contraband — 
they  were  proscribed,  but  not  prosecuted. 
Give  these  defendants  the  benefit  of  the  inher 
ent,  inalienable  Anglo-American  privilege  of 
entertaining  and  promulgating  odious  doc 
trines  at  war  with  the  supposed  highest  inter 
ests  of  the  Church  and  State — let  them  enter 
tain  in  secret,  or  proclaim  in  public,  the  Reso- 
liitions  of  1798-9,  and  they  will  not  be  guilty 
of  any  crime,  however  you  may  differ  with 
them  on  the  doctrinal  question,  as  I  freely 
confess  that  I  do. 

This  brings  me  to  propound  this  question: 
whether,  if  the  revelations  published  by  Gen 
eral  Carrington  in  a  newspaper,  last  summer, 
constituted  the  sum  of  knowledge  of  this  order, 
and  none  of  the  aims,  plots,  schemes  and  con 
spiracies  with  which  the  evidence  connects 
Dodd  and  others,  had  been  divulged — whether, 
I  say,  there  is  a  member  of  this  Court — 
whether  the  Judge  Advocate  would  have  sup 
posed  any  conspiracy  or  treason  lurked  in 
the  printed  work  of  the  order?  The  sponta 
neous  answer  to  this  question  that  rises  to 
every  tongue,  sweeps  away  every  vestige  of 
accusation  based  on  the  theory  that  this  order 
is,  per  sc,  a  conspiracy.  There  arc  several  le- 
gal  consequences  hinging  on  the  solution  of 
this  question.  If  the  order  is,  a  conspiracy 
per  se,  then  not  only  the  defendants,  but  all  the 
naembers,  from  Mr.  Vallaiidigham  down,  are 
conspirators,  and  each  is  affected  by,  and  re 
sponsible  for,  every  act  and  declaration  of  the 
other  done  in  furtherance  of  the  common  de 
sign — for  this  is  the  law  of  conspiracy.  Now, 
what  is  the  "common  design"  of  the  order? 


der,  or  to  the  teachings  and  understanding  of 
its  members,  we  find  the  "common  design" 
to  be  principally  the  success  of  the  Demo 
cratic  party,  or  at  least  the  overthrow  of  the 
party  in  power,  through  the  instrumentality 
of  the  ballot-box,  and  contingently  to  defend 
that  ballot-box,  and  public  and  personal  lib 
erty  from  assault.  No  other  purpose  than  to 
make  a  doctrinal  issue  with  the  party  in 
power,  is  patent  upon  the  face  of  the  written 
work  of  the  order;  and  no  other  purpose 
than  to  defend  the  ballot-box,  and  to  shield 
and  protect  personal  and  public  liberty,  can 
be  deduced  from  the  reliable  evidence  in  this 
case,  and  that,  too,  as  a  measure  of  defense 
against  the  supposed  designs  of  another  se 
cret  order,  known  as  the  "Loyal  League," 
which  was  supposed  to  entertain  views  and 
purposes  inimical  to  the  general  freedom  of 
speech,  press,  and  ballot.  I  can  not  conceive 
of  any  legitimate  line  of  defense  of  either  of 
these  orders.  Without  approving  or  apolo 
gizing  for  either  of  them,  I  can  readily  see, 
and  frankly  admit,  how  a  fanatical  credulity, 
hightened  by  ignorant  agitators  and  cunning 
imposters,  can  believe  foul  schemes  of  each 
other,  and  rush  into  these  dens  of  political 
leprosy  for  mutual  protection,  and  arm  them 
selves  against  the  phantoms  of  their  own  de 
luded  imaginations.  Yet  the  masses  of  both 
of  these  orders  are  law-abiding  and  patriotic, 
but  open  to  the  designs  of  wicked  and  ambi 
tious  men.  If  you  will  go  to  the  rebel  districts, 
you  will  find  Free  Masons  and  Odd  Fellows 
among  the  chief  conspirators  that  put  this 
rebellion  on  foot,  yet  you  can  not  arraign 
those  orders  in  the  North  as  disloyal  and 
treasonable,  because  a  large  number  of  them 
raised  the  arm  of  rebellion  against  the  Gov 
ernment.  I  regard  it  as  one  of  the  most 
melancholy  marks  of  the  disease  of  the  times, 
that  so  many,  otherwise  estimable  and  sensible 
men,  should  voluntarily  seek  so  miserable  a 
refuge  as  the  "Sons  of  Liberty,"  as  a  fortress 
for  offensive  or  defensive  purposes — since, 
born  of  delusion,  it  could  only  end  in  defeat, 
ignominy  and  shame;  and  whilst  its  ruin  is 
hailed  with  general  satisfaction,  neither  the 
bitterest  sneers  that  can  be  uttered  against  its 
blackened  memory,  nor  the  most  obsequious 
homage  that  adulation  can  pay  to  power, 
can  convert  its  faults  and  its  follies  into 
crimes.  It  seems  to  me  if  the  Judge  Advocate 
had  any  confidence  in,  the  order  being  treas 
onable  per  se,  he  would  not  have  procured  the 
additional  evidence  of  extrinsic  facts,  at  the 
price  of  the  liberation  of  Harrison,  Bingham, 
Heffren  and.  Wilson.  The  truth  is,  the  com 
mon  intelligence  of  the  country  revolt  at  the 
assumption  that  the  members  of  this  order  are 
all  traitors.  The  traitors  in  this  order  were 
embraced  in  a  very  small  compass,  and  it  is  a 
noteworthy  fact,  that  the  villainous  scheme 
of  the  few  was  first  challenged,  denounced  and 
crushed  by  third  degree  members  of  the  or 
der;  whilst  the  Stidgers,  under  the  auspices 
of  the  Government  officials,  were  extending 
the  order,  and  urging  treason  to  its^culmina- 
tion.  The  fact  that  a  half  dozen,  or  a  dozen, 
restless  and  corrupt  leaders  of  this  order,  con 
ceived  a  wicked  and  treasonable  plot,  no  more 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


227 


implicates  the  order  than  if  such  leaders  had 
robbed  a  bank  or  burnt  a  church.  All  who 
participate  in  the  robbery  or  arson  are  guilty, 
and  if  perpetrated  in  pursuance  of  a  common 
design,  the  acts  and  declarations  of  each  are 
good  against  the  others,  if  charged  with  con 
spiracy,  but  to  charge  the  whole  order  with 
what  one  or  more  said  and  did,  in  regard  to 
the  robbery  or  arson,  would  be  a  monstrous 
perversion  of,  and  a  lasting  reproach  to,  the 
law,  and  the  shadow  of  a  military  commis 
sion  would  become  a  frightful  specter  at  ev 
ery  fireside  in  the  land.  By  this  illustration, 
I  aim  to  demonstrate  the  obvious  distinction 
and  difference  between  conspiracy  and  treason 
by  relation  and  construction,  and  that  which 
is  brought  home  to  a  party  by  proof  of  guilty 
knowledge,  and  actual  participation.  I  shall 
not  nicely  discriminate  the  various  shades  of 
guilt  or  innocence,  which  might  attach  to 
membership  in  each  degree  of  this  order,  for 
in  the  abstract  theory  of  a  conspiracy  per  se, 
the  mystified,  unsophisticated  neophyte  is,  by 
construction,  as  guilty  as  the  chief  culprit, 
who  bought  arms  to  levy  war;  who  received 
the  gold  of  the  enemy,  to  lavish  in  the  work 
of  hostility  to  the  Government;  or  who  en 
tered  into  schemes  with  wicked,  malignant  and 
rapacious  men,  to  plot  against  the  Government, 
and  to  deliver  up  to  the  devouring  flames  of 
civil  war  the  peace,  the  property,  the  liberties, 
and  the  lives  of  a  betrayed  people.  No  one 
with  his  moral  and  natural  sense  not  wholly 
blunted  by  long  indulgence  in  the  gluttonous 
demands  of  a  partisan  appetite,  can  accept 
the  doctrine.  I  confess  that  I  hear  the  propo 
sition  advanced  with  horror,  and  I  tremble  for 
my  clients  in  the  presence  of  an  imminent 
danger,  which  threatens  to  confound  all  dis 
tinctions,  and  expose  those  who  should  only  be 
branded  with  absurdity  and  folly,  to  the  pen 
alties  of  wicked,  atrocious,  flagitious  treason. 
I  presume  it  has  not  escaped  the  Court,  that 
the  formal  accusation  against  the  defendants 
embraces  five  charges,  with  as  many  specifica 
tions  under  each  charge.  The  first  charge  is 
conspiracy  against  the  Government  of  the 
United  States — the  second  is  a  charge  of  treason. 
in  affording  aid  and  comfort  to  rebels  against 
the  authority  of  the  United  States — the  third 
charge  is  for  "  inciting  insurrection  " — the 
fourth  charge  is  for  "  disloyal  practices  " — and 
the  fifth  charge  is  for  "violation  of  the  laws 
of  war."  I  am  at  a  great  loss  to  divine  under 
which  of  these  charges  a  conviction  will  be 
claimed  by  the  learned  Judge  Advocate.  If  I 
were  not  already  under  many  obligations  for 
his  numerous  acts  of  courtesy  and  kindness 
during  these  protracted  trials,  I  should  have 
so  far  presumed  upon  his  frankness  and  fair 
ness,  as  to  ask  that  information  in  advance, 
but  I  am  left  to  conjecture.  Is  the  defendant 
Humphreys  guilty  of  conspiracy  under  the 
first  charge  and  first  three  specifications?  If 
so,  it  is  solely  by  force  of  membership  in  an 
order,  which  is  a  conspiracy  per  se,  for  the  first 
three  specifications  proceed  upon  that  theory. 
I  have  elsewhere  argued  that  the  written  work 
of  the  order  may  contain  bad  politics,  but  cer 
tainly  violates  no  law — human  or  divine — 
civil  or  military.  If  a  mere  connection  with 


the  order  does  not  make  him  a  conspira 
tor,  then  where  is  the  affirmative,  positive, 
extrinsic  evidence  of  conspiracy  against  him, 
under  the  fourth  specification  of  charge  first? 
I  answer,  there  is  none.  Is  he  guilty  under 
charge  second,  of  treason,  by  affording  aid  and 
comfort  to  rebels?  Pretermitting  all  dis 
cussion  and  opinion,  whether  the  giving  of 
aid  and  comfort  to  domestic  enemies  or  rebels 
can,  in  any  event,  constitute  treason,  I  sub 
mit,  without  further  debate,  and  in  a  spirit  of 
exultation,  that  there  is  not  a  shadow  of  evi 
dence  to  sustain  the  specifications  under  this 
charge,  except  on  the  very  complicated, 
strained  and  visionary  hypothesis,  that  the 
order  is  a  treasonable  conspiracy,  and  that 
Humphreys  is  chargeable,  by  a  fiction  of  law, 
with  all  that  every  member  has  said  or  done, 
within  two  years  past,  however  foreign  to  the 
avowed  purposes  of  the  order.  The  ghost  of 
Jeffreys,  in  his  star  chamber,  surrounded  by 
the  shades  of  his  murdered  victims,  might  hail, 
with  delight,  the  revival  in  America  of  the 
long  lost  legal  fiction,  if  constructive  treason — 
if  this  ingenious,  refined,  cruel  and  fearful 
legal,  military  sophism  is  to  obtain.  Let 
the  shades  of  the  wronged  and  ruined  men  of 
the  past  come  forth  from  their  sepulchers,  and 
protest  against  its  revival  in  this  land  and 
age!  Again,  is  Mr.  Humphreys  amenable  to 
charge  third,"  for  "inciting  insurrection?" 
The  first  specification  lays  the  offense  to  con 
sist  in  arming  a  portion  of  the  citizens  of  the 
United  States,  through  the  Order  of  the  Sons 
of  Liberty,  against  the  authority  of  the  United 
States.  Where  is  the  evidence  to  sustain  this 
against  Humphreys?  All  attempts  to  prove, 
by  credible  witnesses,  that  the  order,  as  such, 
armed  itself  against  the  United  States,  sig 
nally  failed.  As  citizens  of  the  United 
States  they  were  invested,  as  by  charter,  of 
the  indefeasible  right  to  be  armed,  for  pur 
poses  of  defense.  Mr.  Erskine,  on  the  trial 
of  Thomas  Hardy  for  treason,  remarks,  that 
the  preamble  to  the  English  Bill  of  Rights 
enumerated  the  offenses  of  King  James  the 
Second  ;  amongst  the  chief  of  which  was,  his 
causing  his  subjects  to  be  disarmed;  and  then 
our  ancestors  claim  this  violated  right  as  their 
indefeasible  inheritance.  "Let  us,  therefore, 
be  cautious  how  we  rush  to  the  conclusion, 
that  men  are  plotting  treason  against  the  King, 
because  they  are  asserting  a  right,  the  viola 
tion  of  which  has  been  adjudged  against  a 
King,  to  be  treason  against  the  people;  and 
let  us  not  suppose  that  English  subjects  are  a 
banditti,  for  preparing  to  defend  their  lib 
erties." 

The  second  specification  of  the  same  charge 
is  based  on  supposed  incendiary  speeches  and 
seditious  writings.  And  how  much  of  this  is 
Humphreys  guilty  of?  It  is  in  evidence,  that 
he  made  two  or  three  public  speeches,  always 
exhorting  the  people  to  loyalty,  obedience  and 
law;  and  generally  at  the  expense  of  his 
popularity  and  influence  among  his  ultra 
friends.  Some  say  that  he  also  criticised,  with 
freedom,  the  policy  of  the  Administration.  Let 
the  minions  and  parasites  of  power,  and  the 
sycophants  of  titled  authority  in  other  coun 
tries,  swallow  their  speech  and  stifle  their 


228 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


opinions,  but  I  would  not  have  this  Court 
think  so  meanly  of  Mr.  Humphreys,  as  to  sup 
pose  he  could  so  divest  himself  of  all  man 
hood  as  to  do  it — or  that  the  standard  of  free 
thought  and  speech  had  fallen  so  low,  as  to 
call  from  me  an  apology  to  this  Court,  for  the 
audacity  of  Mr.  Humphreys.  On  the  question 
of  free  thought  and  speech,  the  Court  will  al 
low  me  to  borrow  the  following  eloquent  ex 
tract  from  the  great  Webster: 

"Important  as  I  deem  it  to  discuss,  on  all 
proper  occasions,  the  policy  of  the  measures 
at  present  pursued,  it  is  still  more  important 
to  maintain  the  right  of  such  discussion,  in  its 
full  and  just  extent.  Sentiments  lately  sprung 
up,  and  now  growing  fashionable,  make  it  nec 
essary  to  be  explicit  on  this  point.  The  more 
I  perceive  a  disposition  to  check  the  freedom 
of  inquiry,  by  extravagant  and  unconstitu 
tional  pretenses,  the  firmer  shall  be  the  tone  in 
which  I  shall  assert,  and  the  freer  the  manner 
in  which  I  shall  exercise  it.  It  is  the  ancient 
and  undoubted  prerogative  of  this  people  to 
canvass  public  measures,  and  the  merits  of 
public  men.  It  is  a  'home-bred'  right,  a 
fireside  privilege.  It  hath  ever  been  enjoyed 
in  every  house,  cottage,  and  cabin  in  the  na 
tion.  It  is  not  to  be  drawn  into  controversy. 
It  is  as  undoubted  as  the  right  of  breathing 
the  air,  or  walking  on  the  earth.  Belonging 
to  private  life  as  a  right,  it  belongs  to  public 
life  as  a  duty;  and  it  is  the  last  duty  which 
those  whose  representative  I  am,  shall  find  me 
to  abandon.  Aiming  at  all  times  to  be  cour 
teous  and  temperate  in  its  use,  except  when 
the  right  itself  shall  be  questioned,  I  shall 
place  myself  on  the  extreme  boundary  of  my 
right,  and  bid  defiance  to  any  arm  that  would 
move  me  from  my  ground.  This  high  constitu 
tional  privilege  I  shall  defend  and  exercise 
within  this  House,  and  without  this  House,  and 
in  all  places;  in  time  of  peace,  and  at  all  times. 
Living,  I  shall  assert  it,  and  should  I  leave  no 
other  inheritance  to  my  children,  by  the  blessing 
of  God,  I  will  leave  them  the  inheritance  of  free 
principles,  and  the  example  of  a  manly,  inde 
pendent  and  constitutional  defense  of  them." 

In  weighing  the  seditious  and  insurrection 
ary  character  of  speech  in  this  country,  re 
gard  must  be  had  to  the  habits  of  our  people, 
and  the  untrammeled  indulgence  of  the  right, 
at  all  times  and  places,  and  upon  all  subjects, 
by  all  parties,  sects  and  associations.  Who 
shall  say,  that  one  who  has  not  only  indulged 
the  right,  in  the  temperate  support  of  his  own 
opinions,  but  when  he  has  heard  the  boister 
ous  waves  of  popular  excitement  dashing 
against  the  side  of  the  ship  of  State,  at  the 
hazard  of  alienation  from  friends,  has  allayed 
their  strife  and  hushed  their  murmurs,  should 
be  dragged  to  the  bar  of  public  shame,  and 
public  justice,  and  punished  for  the  enormous 
crime  of  inciting  insurrection,  against  a  Gov 
ernment  whose  excellence  he  was  taught  to 
lisp  in  his  cradle,  to  love  in  his  youth,  and  to 
defend  in  his  manhood  ?  What,  in  point  of 
law,  gives  a  seditious  and  insurrectionary 
character  to  speech  ?  Such  speech  is  always 
composed  of  two  elements,  viz.:  1.  Of  words 
of  seditious  import,  addressed  to  the  evil  pas 
sions  of  disaffected  men.  2.  An  insurrection 


ary  intent,  to  foment  civil  commotion,  and 
precipitate  revolt  against  the  Government. 
Who  can  escape  prosecution,  after  the  convic 
tion  of  Humphreys,  except  the  slavish  echoes 
of  a  shifting  partisan  orthodoxy?  It  were 
better  that  the  stroke  of  pestilence,  the  wail 
of  famine,  and  the  earthquake  of  revolution, 
should  all  visit  the  country,  than  to  be  stricken 
with  a  paralysis  of  such  abject,  sottish  sla 
very. 

The  fourth  charge  accuses  him  and  others 
of  "disloyal. practices,"  in  six  specifications, 
in  this,  viz.:  1.  In  advising  others  to  resist 
the  draft.  2.  Arming  the  secret  order  to  re 
sist  the  draft.  3  and  4.  The  same  specifica 
tions  laid  at  different  dates.  5.  In  holding 
military  offices  in  the  order  of  the  "Sons  of 
Liberty."  I  respectfully  submit,  to  the  recol 
lection  of  this  Court,  that  there  is  not  a  scin 
tilla  of  evidence  to  countenance  any  of  these 
specifications.  On  all  occasions,  he  is  shown 
to  have  exhorted  submission  to  the  draft,  and 
obedience  to  law. 

Under  charge  fifth,  for  a  "  violation  of  the 
laws  of  war,"  I  am  at  a  loss  to  know  what  to 
say.  The  very  sound  of  the  charge  is  strange, 
and  the  proposition  itself  is  unfathomable,  by 
the  citizens  of  a  State  that  has  remained  firm 
in  her  integrity  to  the  cause  of-  the  Union — 
lavish  in  her  sacrifices  of  life,  labor,  and 
money,  for  the  National  cause — but,  perhaps, 
it  is  possible,  in  the  anomalous  condition  of 
our  National  affairs,  for  a  citizen  adhering  to 
the  cause  of  the  Federal  Government — engaged 
in  the  peaceful  avocations  of  life — in  no  way 
connected  with  the  army,  nor  amenable  to  mil 
itary  or  martial  law — to  subject  himself  to  the 
laws  of  war,  which  only  prevail  inside  of  mil 
itary  lines,  in  the  enemy's  country,  and  in 
the  presence  of  belligerent  armies.  But  T  con 
fess  that  I  do  not  believe,  that  the  laws  of  war 
prevail  in  Indiana.  The  first  specification 
under  this  charge,  lays  the  guilt  of  Hum 
phreys,  with  others,  in  attempting  to  introduce 
into  the  loyal  States  the  enemies  of  the  United 
States.  Will  it  not  be  a  sufficient  answer  to 
this  specification  to  ask,  what  witness  con 
nects  Mr.  Humphreys  with  any  such  attempt, 
actually  or  constructively  ?  Whatever  force 
it  may  have  as  against  others,  it  is  certainly 
gratuitous  and  without  warrant  in  the  evi 
dence  against  Humphreys.  The  second  speci 
fication  under  this  charge  lays  the  offense  to 
consist  of  organizing  and  extending  a  certain 
unlawful  secret  order,  known  as  the  "  Sons  of 
Liberty,"  or  "American  Knights."  It  is  not 
in  evidence  that  Mr.  Humphreys  ever  organ 
ized,  or  extended,  this  order,  but  it  is  in  evi 
dence,  that  he  burnt  the  records,  and  dis 
banded  the  Temple  to  which  he  belonged,  as 
early  as  last  March.  But,  while  there  is  no 
evidence  connecting  Humphreys  with  this 
enterprise,  there  is  ample  evidence  that  Gen 
eral  Carrington,  through  his  confidential 
agent,  Mr.  Stidger,  engaged  extensively  in  the 
work  in  Kentucky.  This  ought  to  be  accepted 
as  conclusive,  that  there  was  nothing  wrong 
in  the  order  per  se.  To  fix  responsibility  on 
Humphreys,  under  this,  as  well  as  most  of 
the  other  charges,  you  must  first  find  that  this 
order  was  a  treasonable  conspiracy,  and  that 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


229 


its  boasted  half  million  of  members  were  all 
conspirators  and  traitors — and  secondly,  that 
the  organization  and  extension  of  the  order 
was  in  pursuance  of  the  "common  design" 
of  the  conspirators  and  traitors — and  thirdly, 
that  every  thing  that  might  be  said  or  done, 
at  any  time,  or  under  any  circumstances,  in 
any  part  of  the  United  States,  by  any  one  of 
the  half  million  of  members,  affects,  with  guilty 
knowledge  and  plenary  responsibility,  every 
other  member.  Logic  is  a  mighty  engine,  and 
the  human  brain  fertile  in  resources,  but  to 
compass  the  demonstration  of  these  proposi 
tions,  must  be  the  work,  not  of  dialectics,  but 
of  the  sword  that  cut  the  Gordian  knot.  I 
have  now  gone  through  the  charges  and  speci 
fications,  as  they  relate  to  Mr.  Humphreys, 
with  such  observations  as  they  necessarily 
suggested,  to  one  anxious  for  the  fate  of  his 
client.  These  observations  having  an  equal 
application  to  the  charges  as  they  relate  to 
the  cjise  of  Colonel  Bowles,  I  shall  not  recur 
to  them  again. 

This  brings  me  to  a  consideration  of  the 
measure  of  guilt,  as  indicated  by  the  evi 
dence,  first,  of  Andrew  Humphreys,  and,  sec 
ondly,  of  William  A.  Bowles. 

The  term,  "common  design,"  applied  to  this 
order,  is  suggestive  of  all  that  is  absurd,  in 
congruous,  ridiculous,  inconsistent,  contra 
dictory,  and  stupid.  "Multifarious  design" 
is  the  only  term  that  adequately  expresses  the 
inherent  quality  of  the  order.  If  it  had  any 
"  common  design,"  it  has  not  been  made 
manifest,  cither  by  the  written  work  of  the 
order,  or  the  testimony  of  its  members,  or  both 
together.  The  written  work  binds  the  order 
iu  abstract  faith  to  the  Resolutions  of  1798-9, 
as  the  embodiment  of  the  doctrine  of  State 
rights — the  educated,  intelligent  members  of 
the  order  swear  that  it  was  simply  a  political 
organization,  to  advance  the  interests  of  a 
party,  as  they  understood  it — while  others 
understood"  it  to  look  to  defense  at  the  polls 
against  violence — while  the  ignorant  and 
superstitious  witnesses,  from  the  unenlight 
ened  localities,  who  left  the  order  in  a  fit  of 
delirium  tremcns,  and  came  upon  the  witness 
stand  under  a  subdued  terror  of  nightmare, 
swear  that  they  were  actually  sworn  into  the 
service  of  Jefferson  Davis — though  they  did 
not,  I  believe,  sec  either  his  claws  or  his  horns. 
They  also  swear  to  what  the  Peter  Noodles  of 
the  order  said  about  things  in  general,  at  the 
meetings  of  the  township  temples — whilst  the 
detectives  and  spies  have  a  medley  of  all  these, 
which  they  offer  for  our  credence.  The  Court 
must  see  that  this  chameleon  character  of  the 
order  grows  partly  out  of  the  difference  in 
point  of  intelligence  and  opportunity  of  the 
membors,  and  partly  out  of  the  confusion  of 
the  old  orders  of  the  Circle  of  Honor,  Knights 
of  the  Golden  Circle,  the  Circle  of  the  Mighty 
Host,  and  the  like — and  partly  out  of  the 
locality,  people,  and  the  teachers,  in  the  order. 
Harrison,  Bingham  and  Heffren,  for  example, 
understood  it  to  be  purely  political  as  to  the 
masses,  and  also  military,  as  to  a  few,  as  they 
finally  learned.  I  shall  not  stultify  myself 
by  denying  this  military  feature  in  the  order,  j 
uor  that  a  few  desperate  men  of  that  branch, 


in  and  out  of  this  State,  sought  to  precipitate 
the  order  into  revolution ;  but  I  do  deny  the 
complicity  of  Humphreys,  and  a  great  many 
others,  who  had  been  improvidently  named  to 
some  military  office.  If  Humphreys  was 
guilty  of  complicity  in  the  schemes  of  Dodd, 
Bullitt,  and  other  military  chiefs,  why  is  it 
that  he  was  not  running  up  and  down  the 
country,  attending  Grand  and  Supreme  Coun 
cils?  Why  was  he  not  at  Chicago  at  some  of 
their  meetings? *  Why  was  he  not  at  the  meet 
ing  of  the  Supreme  Council,  in  New  York,  last 
February?  Why  was  he  not  dangling  at  the 
heels  of  Vallandigham  at  Hamilton?  Why 
did  he  not  respond  to  Dodd's  summons  to 
attend  the  military  consultation  in  this  city  ? 
And  how  did  he  escape,  and  why  did  not  he 
attract  the  attention  of  spies  and  detectives? 
For  who  does  not  know  that,  the  system  of 
espionage  in  this  State,  would  have  marked 
him  for  the  snares  of  duplicity  and  treachery? 
And  yet  he  escaped.  His  innocence  was  his 
protection,  and  his  character  his  shield. 

Andrew  Humphreys,  when  called  on  to  an 
swer  these  charges,  was  taken  from  the  body 
of  a  loyal,  but,  in  some  respects,  misguided 
people.  He  occupied  a  proud  eminence,  not  in 
place  and  authority,  but  in  the  confidence  and 
hearts  of  all  who  knew  him.  Impulsive  in  his 
nature,  free  in  his  thoughts,  sincere  in  his  at 
tachments,  confiding  in  his  intercourse,  firm 
in  his  convictions,  and  brave  and  generous  in 
all  his  relations,  imbued  with  hereditary  jeal 
ousy  of  arbitrary  power,  he  was  the  favorite 
companion  of  his  political  friends;  and  who 
ever  sought  his  counsels  in  the  interest  of 
peace  and  law,  ever  found  him  faithful  to  the 
highest  obligations  of  citizenship.  The  honest 
people  with  whom  he  lived,  and  who  knew  his 
worst  faults,  of  partisan  zeal,  and  who  knew 
all  of  criminality  that  this  trial  has  devel 
oped  against  him,  and  no  one  supposed  him 
guilty  of  any  one  of  the  gross  and  enormous 
crimes  with  which  he  stands  accused  on  the 
records  of  this  Court.  Clothed  with  conscious 
innocence,  and  with  the  kind  wishes  and  bless 
ings  of  those  people,  of  all  parties,  he  stands 
to-day  before  this  Court  without  shame  and 
without  fear — without  shame,  because  he  has 
neither  said  nor  done  any  thing  at  war  with 
the  true  principles  of  religion,  of  liberty,  of 
loyalty,  or  law — without  fear,  because  he  be 
lieves  his  fate  is  in  the  hands  of  those  whose 
abilities  and  dispositions  are  equal  to  the  task 
of  his  vindication — that  the  goodness  of  your 
justice  is  equal  to  the  power  of  your  trust. 
That  Mr.  Humphreys  is  free  from  fault,  is  more 
than  I  shall  urge,  but  this  Court  was  not 
clothed  with  power  and  authority  to  punish 
the  social  or  political  faults  of  men;  and  even, 
if  it  were,  the  temporary  reproach  which  this 
trial  has  conferred  upon  him,  is  penalty 
enough  for  his  brief  connection  with  an  or 
der  whose  claims  upon  his  fealty  and  allegi 
ance  he  indignantly  shook  off  in  March,  18(54, 
and  as  a  testimony  against  it,  deliberately 
burned  its  records  and  washed  his  hands  of 
all  responsibility  for  its  existence;  and  if 
others  had  done  as  well — if  detectives  had  not 
given  it  Government  aid — the  whole  fabric  of 
the  order  would  have  tumbled  into  ruins  long 


230 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


before  it  did.  It  is  one  thing,  if  it  pleases  the 
Court,  for  a  party  man,  in  a  sanguine,  warm, 
and  even  impassioned  manner,  without  conceal 
ment  and  without  apology, to  plead  against  the 
measures  of  Administration  and  the  abuses  of 
power,  looking  all  the  while  to  the  public 
good — this  may  be  a  partisan  fault,  but  no 
crime;  and  quite  another  thing  for  a  party 
man,  when  our  Government  is  in  the  throes  of 
a  life  and  death  struggle,  to  play  the  agitator, 
and,  in  the  name  of  patriotism,  to  utter  ac 
cents  of  despair;  appeal  to  the  selfish,  bad  pas 
sions  of  men;  sow  the  seeds,  by  unworthy 
speech,  of  demoralization  in  our  armies; 
thwart  and  paralyze  the  honest,  efforts  of  Gov 
ernment  to  maintain  its  authority,  by  cal 
umny  and  denunciation — this  would  be  a 
grievous  abuse  of  the  liberty  of  speech,  but 
no  crime  of  treason — and  still  another  and  a 
wickeder  thing,  to  go  howling  about  the  coun 
try,  and  in  flaming  speech  and  mock  patri 
otism,  arraigning  the  public  authorities  as 
usurpers,  tyrants  and  despots,  poisoning  the 
public  heart  against  those  in  authority,  clam 
oring  for  peace  in  the  face  of  embattled  armies, 
fanning  the  embers  of  discord  and  revolt, 
kindling,  by  incendiary  appeal,  the  fires  of  in 
surrection  and  revolution,  and  finally  identi 
fying  himself  with  the  cause  of  rebels  and 
traitors,  and  lending  himself,  in  thought  and 
deed,  by  night  and  by  day,  in  secret  and  in 
public,  giving  aid  and  comfort  to  the  public 
enemy  against  his  own  Government — this  is 
conspiracy  find  treason — it  has  all  the  disloyal  lin- 
eaments  of  treasonable  deformity,  and  neither 
eloquence  nor  art,  neither  painting  nor  poetry, 
can  change  it — its  office  is  discord,  war  and 
misery.  The  fault  first  mentioned  is  common 
to  all  Americans,  and  I  consign  Mr.  Hum 
phreys  to  the  company  of  that  class  of  men, 
whose  whole  fault  is  in  ministering  conscien 
tiously  and  innocently,  but  perhaps  too  lav 
ishly,  to  the  partisan  zeal  of  his  friends,  but 
this  is  more  than  compensated  in  the  ready 
promptitude  with  which  he  has  always  re 
sponded  to  the  demands  of  law,  order,  and  au 
thority,  in  those  frank,  earnest  exhortations 
to  the  people,  which  never  failed  to  allay 
the  temper  of  excited  men,  and  restore  the 
supremacy  of  reason  and  law.  If  it  please 
.  this  honorable  Court  to  assign  him  to  the  sec 
ond  category  of  offenders,  then,  I  say,  a  bright 
life,  of  resolute  devotion  to  the  public  good,  is 
to  that  extent  tarnished  and  obscured,  but  not 
stamped  with  the  dark  hues  of  crime,  known 
to  any  established  law,  civil  or  military,  com 
mon  or  martial.  Censure,  calumniate,  revile 
him,  if  you  please,  for  his  mistakes,  errors, 
and  vicious  sentiments,  and  I  shall  only  find 
less  in  him  to  commend,  and  more  to  deplore, 
for  the  less  happy  position  you  have  assigned; 
but,  gentlemen,  in  the  name  of  law  and  jus 
tice — in  the  name  of  that  legitimate  authority 
of  better  days,  which,  I  trust,  will  return  to 
us  again,  when  the  snowy  banner  of  peace 
shall  herald  a  restored  Union,  and  a  fraternal 
people — in  the  name  of  that  shadow  of  com 
punction  and  retribution  which  follows  the 
havoc  of  those  who  rule  by  passion,  and  per 
secute  by  faith — in  the  name  of  those  sorrows 
and  griefs  which  a  harsh  imprisonment  has 


added  to  the  wounds  of  a  sensitive  and  proud 
spirit — in  the  name  of  that  liberty  of  opinion 
and  speech  which,  in  every  country,  has  been 
the  last  which  the  subject  has  wrested  from 
pOAver,  as  it  has  always  been  the  first  which 
power  has  wrested  from  the  subject — in  the 
name  of  that  little  family  circle  whose  memo 
ries  and  affections  clustered  around  him  in 
his  happier  days — in  the  name  of  that  deep 
public  interest  which  the  magnitude  of  these 
trials  has  evoked,  and  that  scrutiny  of  his 
tory  which  your  record  will  invite — in  the 
name,  I  say,  of  all  these  interests,  I  entreat 
you  to  make  this,  your  judicial  record,  as  il 
lustrious  for  its  probity,  learning,  impartial 
ity  and  justice,  as  your  military  record  can 
be,  under  the  highest  gallantry,  and  the  most 
auspicious  fortunes  of  war. 

It  would  be  a  useless  consumption  of  time 
to  discuss  the  elements  of  the  third  cate-« 
gory,  in  which  I  concede  disloyalty,  conspir 
acy,  and  treason  all  abide;  and  if  you  can, 
gentlemen,  in  your  consciences,  bound  by  the 
'highest  obligations  of  oath  and  honor,  assign 
him  to  this  category  of  shame,  of  guilt,  of 
punishment,  I  could  only  say  that  the  startling 
conviction  would  be  more  productive  of  horror, 
than  the  turpitude  of  the  crime  of  which  he  is 
convicted.  Is  it  an  example  that  is  wanted? 
Our  people  are  practically  a  unit  in  their  al 
legiance  and  devotion  to  the  Constitution  and 
the  Government,  and  as  long  as  I  have  a  voice 
I  will  labor  to  keep  them  so;  but  no  Govern 
ment  can  rule  long,  by  torture  and  terror,  a 
people  accustomed  to  be  governed  through 
their  affections,  and  while  one  such  example 
might  be  potent,  to  weaken  the  bo-nds  of  loy 
alty,  for  this  latitude  and  generation,  while 
the  guiltiest  of  the  accused  have  made  their 
atonement  on  the  witness  stand;  the  liberal 
ity,  the  generosity,  and  the  humanity  of  all 
parties,  sexes,  and  ages,  would  embalm  it  in 
their  sorrows,  as  a  melancholy  act  of  vindic 
tive  justice,  such  as  history  records  only  of 
crumbling  and  expiring  dynasties.  For  this 
rebellion  and  its  horrible  consequences  to  the 
nation,  I  have  but  one  language  and  one  sen 
timent,  in  Court  and  out,  from  its  commence 
ment  to  the  present  day — and  for  those  of  the 
North  who  withdraw  their  sympathy  and  alle 
giance  from  the  Government,  in  the  hour  of 
its  trial,  in  this  crisis  of  its  fate,  and  conspire 
for  its  overthrow  and  the  success  of  the  rebel 
cause,  no  matter  who  administers  the  Govern 
ment,  or  what  the  policy,  I  have  but  one  sen 
tence — for  I  feel  too  much  interest  in  the  cause 
as  a  citizen,  to  prove  false  as  a  lawyer — and 
if  the  law  and  the  evidence  demand  their 
blood  to  fertilize  the  land  they  betrayed  and 
dishonored,  I  will  not  murmur.  But  in  the 
name  of  this  National  cause,  I  claim  the  right 
to  protest  against  the  useless  sacrifice  of  any 
man,  however  humble,  or  however  heretical 
in  his  partisan  politics,  either  for  the  idle  pur 
poses  of  an  example,  for  the  atonement  of  po 
litical  offenses,  or  for  the  propitiation  of 
power. 

Now,  what  is  the  evidence  against  Andrew 
Humphreys,  that  he  should  be  forced  through 
the  solemn  forms  of  trial?  Mr.  "William  M. 
Harrison,  a  witness  for  the  Government, 


TREASON    TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


231 


swears  that  Humphreys  was  appointed  a  Ma 
jor  Genera]  in  the  order,  at  a  Council  meeting 
at  Indianapolis,  10th  of  September,  18G3,  and 
was  also  re-appointed  at  the  February  Coun 
cil,  1864,  but  was  not  present  at  either  meet 
ing,  and  was  never  iiptificd  of  his  appoint 
ment  by  him,  as  the  Secretary.  That  Hum 
phreys  never  attended  more  than  one  State 
Council,  and  that  was  the  night  session  of  the 
meeting  at  Indianapolis,  in  June,  1804.  The 
Judge  Advocate  asked  one  question^  in  such 
form,  as  apparently  made  him  say,  that  Hum 
phreys  was  present  at  the  September  meeting, 
1803,  but  he  corrected  it  fully  on  cross-exam 
ination.  He  was  not  present  when  the  mili 
tary  bill  was  discussed,  or  adopted.  There  is 
no  legitimate  evidence  that  he  either  knew  of, 
or  ever  accepted  this  appointment.  Stidger 
swears  that  Bowles  had  something  to  say 
about  Humphreys  accepting  a  brigadier's  com 
mission  to  stay  in  the  rear.  Stidger  also  pre 
tends  that  he  saw  Humphreys  at  the  Council 
in  the  day-time,  in  June,  1804;  that  he  sat  be 
hind  him  on  a  seat  in  the  hall,  and  was  referred 
to  by  one  or  mare  speakers — this  statement 
was  wholly  untrue.  Heffren  swears  that 
Humphreys  was  not  present  when  elected  Ma 
jor  General.  He  also  swears  that  he  had  an 
interview  with  Humphreys  last  spring,  at 
the  Greencastle  Junction,  when  coming  to  this 
city — they  talked  about  the  order — and  Hum 
phreys  said  "it  would  not  do.  We  must  de 
pend  on  Chicago" — and  he  said  "he  was  for 
his  country,  right  or  wrong" — and  "would 
have  nothing  further  to  do  with  the  order,  and 
advised  me  to  quit  it."  Thus,  the  Govern 
ment's  own  witness  bears  faithful  testimony 
to  Mr.  Humphreys'  steadfast  loyalty.  This  is 
all  the  evidence  that  bears,  in  any  way,- on 
his  connection  with  the  order — an  order  on 
which  he  had  set  the  seal  of  his  condemnation, 
long  before  Dodd  and  his  wild  schemes  had 
awakened  suspicion  any- where.  I  now  invite 
the  attention  of  the  Court,  while  I  follow  Mr. 
Humphreys  to  the  counties  of  Sullivan  and 
Green,  where  he  has  lived  for  so  many  years, 
enjoying  the  confidence,  respect,  and  official 
honors  that  are  always  held  in  reserve,  by  the 
people,  for  their  true  men.  It  is  a  source  of  no 
little  pride  and  gratulation  to  Mr.  Humphreys 
to  see  that  the  Government  could  bring  not  one 
of  his  neighbors,  not  even  a  personal  enemy, 
to  swear  against  him — that  lived  nearer  than 
nine  miles — Mr.  Elisha  Cowgill,  the  timid 
Provost  Marshal,  living  thirty  miles,  and  Mr. 
Nicholas  Cochraue,  nine  or  ten  miles,  from  the 
home  of  Humphreys.  This  satisfaction  is  the 
reward  of  a  well-spent-life,  in  the  midst  of  an 
honest,  gallant,  high-toned  people.  All  parties 
and  classes  shrink  from  pursuing  him,  and 
stand  appalled  at  the  supposed  perils  of  his 
situation.  From  this  proud  eminence  of  moral 
worth,  he  this  day  surveys  his  accusers  with 
no  narrow  sentiments  of  hate  or  revenge,  but 
with  those  calm  and  serene  reflections  which 
only  spring  from  that  honor  and  magnanim 
ity,  which  make  large  allowance  for  errors 
and  misunderstandings  among  men.  From 
that  same  eminence  he  surveys  the  array  of 
his  judges,  and  while  he  thinks  he  can  read 
his  acquittal  in  the  sympathetic  expression  of 


the  Court,  he  still  leans  upon  you  with  the  same 
anxious  confidence  which  he  reposed  at  the 
beginning  of  this  trial,  and  will  so  continue, 
until  your  final  verdict  shall  wipe  away  all 
'reproach  from  his  character.  Mr.  Cowgill, 
who  lives  thirty  miles  from  the  accused,  comes 
before  this  Court  to  say  that  "about  the  fourth 
day  of  June,  1863,  I  saw  Mr.  Humphreys 
in  Sullivan  county,  at  the  head  of  an  army  of 
four  hundred  men."  What  do  the  Court  think 
of  the  witness?  Do  you  think  him  a  fair  wit 
ness,  in  view  of  the  sequel  disclosed  by  other 
witnesses?  He  says  some  of  the  crowd  called 
him  a  "damned  Abolition  rascal."  I  think, 
myself,  that  ai^rmy  of  four  hundred  men  had 
very  little  to  9^^  uttering  such  personal  in 
sinuations  against  so  good  a  man,  and  I  assure 
him,  if  Humphreys  had  had  the  training  of 
that  army,  the  offensive  charge  would  never 
have  been  uttered.  The  Judge  Advocate  asks 
him,  "  What  was  Humphreys'  share  in  the 
transactions  of  that  day?  Did  he  undertake 
to  subdue  the  mob,  or  to  lead  it?"  To  which 
this  meek  and  exemplary  gentleman  is  com 
pelled  to  answer — "Humphreys  spoke  a  sec 
ond  time,  and  did  advise  them  to  go  home, 
and  mind  their  own  business,  and  asked  me  if 
I  did  not  indorse  his  speech — I  said  I  did."  I 
confess,  I  have  had  my  suspicions  of  Hum 
phreys'  speech  ever  since  this  witness  swore 
that  he  indorsed  it — my  confidence  in  the 
speech  has  been  very  much(  shaken.  In  the 
next  breath  this  witness  swears  that  "Hum 
phreys  did  not  try  to  stop  the  excited  crowd, 
in  my  presence."  How  is  this  to  be  reconciled  ? 
Here  was  a  crowd  of  two  hundred  excited  men, 
which  he  put  down  at  four  hundred — here  was 
Humphreys,  who,  having  been  sent  for  to 
quell  the  threatened  disturbance,  had  come 
twelve  miles — addressed  the  crowd  twice,  ex 
horting  them  to  go  home,  and  keep  the  peace, 
with  the  repeated  assurance  that  the  Govern 
ment  would  do  them  no  harm;  that  the  sol 
diers  had  returned  the  horses,  and  the  crowd 
must  disperse — yet,  he  says,  Humphreys  did 
nothing  in  his  presence  to  stop  them,  although 
the  speeches  that  Humphreys  made  to  the  men 
he  fully  indorsed  himself.  But  the  coolest 
piece  of  imposture,  that  these  fraudulent  times 
have  witnessed,  was  the  request  that  he  made 
on  Humphreys,  to  tell  the  crowd  that  "he  (the 
witness)  was  a  gentleman,  and  the  crowd  must 
hear  him  speak'' — and  which  was  only  equaled 
by  the  violent  presumption  and  false  charity 
with  which  Humphreys  gave  the  unconscion 
able  assurance  to  the  crowd.  He  swore  that 
a  man  by  the  name  of  Ussery  tried  to  get 
him  drunk,  but  that  he  got  Ussery  drunk — 
this  matchless  piece  of  generalship  consisted 
in  his  capacity  to  drink  more  strychnine 
whisky  than  Ussery.  He  says  Humphreys 
had  a  pistol  to  his  side — and,  I  venture,  the 
witness  had  two  or  three  of  them.  The  Gov 
ernment,  then,  makes  nothing  out  of  this  meet 
ing,  but  credit  and  honor  for  Humphreys. 
The  witnesses  for  the  defense  explain  the 
origin  and  character  of  this  meeting,  and  if 
they  show  an  undue  excitement  of  the  people, 
without  adequate  cause,  they,  at  the  same  time, 
show  a  most  commendable  discharge  of  duty 
on  the  part  of  Humphreys.  The  Government 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


next  introduced  a  modest  and  fair-minded 
man,  by  the  name  of  Nicholas  Cochrane,  living 
nine  miles  away.  He  heard  Mr.  Humphreys 
make  a  speech  in  Jackson  township,  Sullivan 
county,  on  the  5th  of  September,  1863,  at  a 
Democratic  picnic.  His  description  of  the 
speech  is  in  these  words:  "He  criticised  the 
Administration  tolerably  strong — he  seemed 
solicitous  for  peace — to  be  out  of  the  war — and 
he  seemed  to  think  that  the  Democratic  party 
was  imposed  upon,  and  ought  to  stand  up  to 
their  rights — the  general  run  of  his  speech 
was  in  opposition  to  the  present  Administra 
tion."  Is  there  any  sedition  or  treason  in 
this?  But  there  were  other  speeches  by  other 
gentlemen,  and  among  the  rest  one  by  some 
Georgia  man,  who  called  himself  a  rebel.  I 
suppose  he  was  not  a  very  dangerous  rebel, 
as  another  witness  testifies  that  he  had  taken 
the  oath  of  allegiance  from  the  military  au 
thorities,  and  had  been  long  employed  in  the 
quartermaster's  department,  in  this  State — so 
that  if  any  one  is  responsible  for  a  "rebel" 
being  at  large,  it  was  not  Humphreys — nor 
was  Humphreys  responsible  for  all  who  might 
attend  a  public  meeting.  This  man,  other  wit 
nesses  say,  was  not  an  invited  speaker,  but 
was  called  on  at  the  close  of  the  meeting  to 
get  up  that  the  crowd  might  see  him — and 
then  talked  to  them  about  five  minutes.  The 
Judge  Advocate  was  imposed  upon  when  he 
was  led  to  give  any  consequence  to  this  cir 
cumstance.  He  would  scorn  to  throw  such 
trash  into  the  scale  against  the  innocence  of 
any  man.  Mr.  Humphreys,  witness  says, 
advised  this  meeting  to  disperse,  and  go  home 
in  peace.  Is  there  treason,  or  disloyal  prac 
tice  in  all  this  ?  Shall  the  guileless  simplicity 
of  his  character  be  tortured  into  hypocrisy, 
and  from  hypocrisy  into  crime  ?  This  is  all 
the  evidence  of  the  Government  touching 
seditious  speeches  by  the  accused.  A  number 
of  witnesses  were  called  for  Mr.  Humphreys, 
as  to  character  and  conduct  at  home,  as  a  cit 
izen,  but  much  of  their  testimony  is  unimpor 
tant.  They  all  sustain  his  unblemished  repu 
tation  for  morality,  honesty,  honor,  patriot 
ism  and  loyalty.  Two  Republican  neighbors, 
among  others,  indorse  him  in  these  respects. 
Mr.  Wines  had  heard  him  make  two  or  more 
speeches  on  politics,  the  draft,  and  the  duty  of 
all  his  neighbors.  He  reports  him  as  saying  : 
"I  advise  no  man  to  resist  the  draft,  nor  in 
deed  any  law  of  Congress,  but  I  advise  all  to 
be  good,  law-abiding  citizens."  At  another 
meeting,  he  heard  him  say  to  the  people,  in  a 
speech,  that  "Resistance  to  the  Government 
would  not  do,  at  all,  in  any  shape  or  form — 
disaster  would  be  sure  to  overtake  them. 
They  must  remain  at  home,  and  submit  quiet 
ly  to  the  laws  of  the  Government."  I  ask 
again,  is  this  inciting  insurrection?  This 
witness  says  that  Humphreys  then  made  an 
effort  to  raise  money  to  procure  substitutes 
t'cr  poor  men.  Was  this  a  disloyal  practice? 
Ajiairi,  this  same  witness  says  that  Mr.  Hum 
phreys  at  another  time  "exhorted  the  people 
to  obey  the  laws." 

Mr.  Johnson  is  another  witness  who  gave 
Mr.  Humphreys  an  excellent  character'  for 
loyalty  and  patriotism  in  general,  but  thought, 


on  one  occasion,  he  read  Washington's  Fare 
well  Address,  and  Jeiferson's  writings,  in  sup 
port  of  the  doctrines  of  secession;  but  as  we 
were  not  allowed  to  prove  that  he  was  mistaken, 
and  as  the  Judge  Advocate  claims  no  affirma 
tive  force  for  the  evidence,  we  will  give  it  no 
further  attention.  Mr.  Johnson  was  a  Republi 
can  gentleman,  of  moderate  literary  accom 
plishments!,  and  was  prone  to  construe  every 
argumentagainst  sectional  agitation  and  in  fa 
vor  of  State  rights  into  a  secession  argument — 
in  this  he  is,  by  no  means,  singularoreccentric, 
for  it  is  a  prevailing  weakness  of  the  times. 
But  in  view  of  all  that  Humphreys  has  said, 
under  every  change  of  circumstance,  and  un 
der  the  strongest  temptations  to  waver — if 
it  were  not  indelicate — I  would  like  to  ask 
each  member  of  the  Court,  whether  he  can 
show  an  escutcheon  of  loyalty  as  bright  with 
the  repeated  utterances  of  fidelity  to  the  Gov 
ernment,  devotion  to  the  Union,  obedience  to 
law,  as  Humphreys  has  registered  upon  the 
memories  of  these  witnesses,  and  upon  the 
hearts  of  his  neighbors. 

There  is  one  other  important  fact,  with 
which  I  will  refresh  the  recollection  of  the 
Court,  in  favor  of  Mr.  Humphreys.  On  page 
35  of  the  Record,  of  November  17,  after  some 
discussion,  Mr.  WTm.  Moss,  a  witness  for 
Humphreys,  and  who  was  a  delegate  in  at 
tendance  at  the  Grand  Council,  in  February, 
when  Humphreys  was  appointed  Major  Gen 
eral,  swears  that  he  was  authorized  to  convey 
to  Mr.  Humphreys  notice  of  his  appointment — 
in  answer  to  a  question,  whether  Humphreys, 
on  being  informed  of  his  appointment,  re 
jected  or  accepted  it?  His  answer  was — "I 
know  he  rejected  it."  This  would  seem  to  be 
conclusive  on  the  question,  and  ought  to  with 
draw  that  point  from  all  controversy.  Mr. 
Moss  also  heard  Humphreys'  speech  to  the  peo 
ple  when  Mr.  Cowgill  was  present — heard  him 
exhort  the  people  to  disperse,  and  go  home  and 
keep  the  peace — that  the  Government  had  not, 
and  would  not,  send  soldiers  out  to  harass 
them — and  they  did  disperse.  Mr.  Price  tes 
tifies  to  the  same  thing,  at  the  same  meeting. 
If  Humphreys  was  a  bad  man,  his  neighbors 
would  know  it — but  none  appeared  against 
him.  From  Moss'  testimony,  it  appears  im 
possible,  from  entries  in  their  partnership 
books,  late  in  the  evening  before,  that  ho 
should  have  been  at  the  Council  in  June  last. 

Bear  with  me,  gentlemen,  while  I  sum  up 
the  testimony  for  and  against  Colonel  Bowles. 
I  am  betraying  no  trust,  when  I  admit  that  I 
am  oppressed  with  the  weight  of  the  circum 
stances  which  throw  their  dismal  shadows 
across  his  pathway,  and  shut  out  some  of  that 
mellow  sunlight  which  is  so  essential  to 
quicken  with  gladness  the  feeble  pulse  of  age. 
An  old  man,  who  comes  down  to  us  from  a 
past  generation  of  heroes  and  giants,  is  before 
you,  struggling  in  the  toils  that  accident,  mis 
placed  confidence,  or  foul  intrigue  has  spread 
for  his  destruction.  Such  a  sight  has  not 
been  witnessed  before  in  this  country,  and 
the  pen  of  history  is  waiting  to  record  the 
momentous  issue  made  up  between  him  and 
his  Government.  The  moral  sinews  of  a  no 
ble  nature  eustain  him  with  dignity  in  tho 


TREASON    TRIALS    AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


233 


presence  of  any  peril,  and  if  only  tears  of 
mercy  can  win  him  deliverance,  they  would 
refuse  to  flow.  The  unsuspecting  simplicity 
of  the  old  man,  has  proved  a  snare  to  his 
feet,  and  marked  him  an  easy  prey  for  the 
kites  and  vultures  of  society,  who,  under  the 
deceitful  guise  of  curing  abuses,  and  in  the 
misapplication  of  doctrines  and  maxims,  that 
underlie  all  free  States,  win,  traffic  and  trade 
in  confidence  as  a  merchandise  of  the  market. 
It  is  only  to  be  regretted,  that  Colonel  Bowles 
has  not  an  abler  and  more  learned  counsel  to 
give  force  to  those  circumstances,  that  tell  but 
too  plainly  the  extent  of  his  wrongs,  and  to 
erect  around  him  a  bulwark  of  innocence,  jus 
tice  and  law.  I  am  not  about  to  urge  any  new 
theory  of  human  responsibility — all  that  the 
evidence  proves,  or  fairly  implies,  he  accepts, 
and  it  is  with  that  evidence  that  I  now  pro 
pose  to  deal.  But  in  this  connection,  I  will 
ask  this  question,  and  I  ask  the  Court  to  dwell 
upon  it — it  is  suggestive  of  more  than  it  ex 
presses — does  it  not  stagger  human  faith,  that 
an  old  man,  near  seventy  years  of  age — dead 
to  all  the  motives  of  young  ambition — with 
the  whole  field  of  human  enterprise,  by  the 
advance  of  years,  contracted  around  him, 
soon  to  be  narrowed  to  the  compass  of  the 
grave — no  dream  of  ambition,  of  wealth,  of 
fame,  of  love,  of  romance,  of  chivalry,  to 
quicken  his  limbs,  or  fire  his  heart — should 
voluntarily  become  the  leader,  and  chief  con 
spirator,  in  these  alleged  crimes?  Was  it 
glory  that  he  sought  amid  the  din  of  arms? — 
there  was  no  glory  in  the  debasing  plots  of 
murder,  rapine,  insurrection,  conflagration, 
and  plunder.  Was  it  wealth  that  he  desired? — 
he  needed  not  wealth,  for  he  was  surrounded 
by  broad  acres,  and  the  refinements  and  ele 
gancies  of  life.  Was  it  a  morbid  political  de 
lusion  in  favor  of  the  rebel  cause? — if  so,  he 
could  have  enlisted  in  that  cause  four  years 
ago,  and  secured  its  doubtful  honors,  while  he 
could  have  saved  himself  an  immense  estate 
in  the  South  from  confiscation.  Was  it  a  mean, 
low,  political  popularity  at  home  that  he 
sought?  No,  for  he  had  courted  no  political 
favor  for  near  twenty  years.  But  why  dwell 
in  the  regions  of  fancy  and  speculation,  when 
every  thread,  and  every  fiber,  of  the  network 
that  is  woven  around  him,  proclaim,  in  char 
acters  of  living  light,  that  his  hospitality  has 
been  abused — that  his  open  hand,  open  heart, 
and  open  house  exposed  him  to  the  arts  and 
wiles  of  reckless  and  unscrupulous  men  ? 

Without  attempting  to  deal  with  the  evidence 
in  detail,  it  will  suffice  for  me  to  say,  that  the 
Government's  evidence  tends  to  bring  Colonel 
Bowles  within  the  charges:  1.  Of  conspiracy; 
2.  Of  treason;  3.  Of  disloyal  practices;  and 
4.  Of  violation  of  the  laws  of  war.  The  acts 
and  aims  that  implicate  him  in  the  one  or  the 
other  of  these  charges  are  proved,  in  the  main, 
by  the  statements  and  declarations  of  persons 
more  or  less  connected  with  the  "Sons  of  Lib 
erty,"  but  who  do  not  admit  that  they  were 
themselves  implicated  in  any  actual  or  con 
templated  scheme  of  disloyalty — and  whose 
declarations  and  statements,  therefore,  can 
implicate  no  one  but  themselves — because,  not 
being  actual  conspirators  themselves,  their 


declarations  are  inadmissible  against  others; 
for  I  maintain  that  unless  the  Government  can 
bring  declarations  from  actual  conspirators 
engaged  in  a  "common  design"  with  the  ac 
cused,  they  are  inadmissible. 

The  whole  question  of  the  admissibility  of 
these  declarations  of  members  of  the  order, 
simply  because  they  are  members,  is  held  in. 
abeyance  by  the  Court,  and  is  still  an  open 
one,  to  abide  the  antecedent  decision  of  the 
question  whether  the  order  is  a  treasonable 
conspiracy?  And  unless  you  hold  that  it  is, 
all  these  statements  affecting  Colonel  Bowles 
fall  to  the  ground. 

The  acts  and  aims  which  the  evidence  tends 
to  establish  against  Colonel  Bowles,  consist,  as 
will  be  claimed:  1.  In  his  membership  in  an 
unlawful  secret  society;  2.  The  arming  of 
men  to  resist  the  authority  of  the  Govern 
ment;  3.  Conspiring  to  put  on  foot  an  insur 
rection  in  aid  of  the  rebellion,  by  seizing  the 
arsenals  in  several  of  the  States,  liberating 
rebel  prisoners,  deposing  the  Governor  of  this 
State,  and  striking  for  a  North-western  Con 
federacy,  or  an  alliance  with  the  Southern; 

4.  Accepting  and  acting  under  a  commission 
of  Major-General  from  the  "Sons  of  Liberty." 

5.  Attending   the  conclaves    at   Chicago,  and 
mingling  in  the  councils  of  traitors,  and  divid 
ing  large  sums  of  rebel  money  with  the  military 
heads    of  the    order;    6.    By    complicity   with 
Booking   and    others    in    his   Greek-fire   pre 
parations    to   destroy  Government   property; 
7.    Having   intercourse    and    correspondence 
with  rebels,  through  one  Dickerson,  of  Balti 
more;    8.   The    distribution    of  money  to    the 
order  to  buy  arms  to  resist  the  Government. 
This  is  a  huge  array  of  atrocities,  and  if  the 
half  has  been  proved  by  legitimate  testimony, 
I  should  have  more  pity  for  his  fate  than  hope 
for  his  deliverance.     It  would  not  be  an  im 
possible  nor  an  improbable  thing  for  a  man 
like  Colonel    Bowles    to   follow  a    great  way, 
blindly,  the  artful  leaders  in  such  a  scheme, 
without  comprehending  or  suspecting  its  bear 
ings,  beca,use  all  was  being  done  in  the  name 
of  the  order,  whose  legitimate  objects  he  knew 
were  lawful.     This,  I  claim,  is  true  of  Colonel 
Bowles.     It  was  somewhat  different  with  Mr. 
Humphreys  in  this  respect.     He  suspected  the 
order  as  early  as  March,  1864,  and  when  Mr. 
Moss  conveyed  to  him  the  intelligence  of  his 
appointment  as  Major-Genei-al,  together  with 
information  of  the    action  of  the  Council  at 
Indianapolis  on  the  military  bill,  he  at  once 
denounced  and  renounced  the  order,  and  re 
jected  the  commission,  and  gave  as  a  reason 
that  he  was  not  aware  before  that  there  was 
any  such  military  feature  connected  with  the 
order.    He  then  sent  for  the  records  and  papers 
of  the  temple  in  his  township,  burnt  them  ia 
the  stove,  and  washed  his  hands  of  the  order. 
See  testimony  of  Wm.  Moss,  November  17, 18C4. 

Was  he  a  member  of  the  order?  Perhaps 
he  was;  and  yet  the  evidence  shows  that  he 
either  did  not  know,  or  did  not  care  for  the 
obligations  of  secrecy,  as  he  seems  to  have 
talked  to  every  body  with  great  freedom  upon 
the  subject.  But  even  that  membership,  I 
have  shown,  amounts  to  neither  of  the  offenses 
charged. 


234 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


To  constitute  conspiracy,  there  must  be  con 
cert,  concurrence,  agreement,  assent,  by  all 
the  parties,  with  a  knowledge  and  approval  of 
the  common  design.  Where  there  is  no  com 
mon  design,  there  can  be  no  conspiracy,  and 
where  there  is  a  common  design,  its  object 
must  be  unlawful.  After  the  escape  of  Dodd, 
the  absence  of  Walker,  the  arrest  of  Bullitt 
and  Barrett,  and  the  discharge  of  Harrison, 
Bingham,  Hcffren  and  Wilson,  the  banishment 
of  Kalfus  and  others,  and  the  imprisonment 
of  Yeakle  and  Booking,  Bowles  becomes  the 
most  prominent,  as  he  is  the  worst  seduced, 
betrayed  and  injured  figure  in  the  foreground. 
It  will,  no  doubt,  be  argued  by  the  learned 
Judge  Advocate,  that  Bowles  was  a  prime  in 
stigator  of  treason.  All  the  testimony  that 
makes  him  a  traitor,  tends  to  show  that  he 
was  seduced  and  betrayed  into  a  false  posi 
tion  by  the  wily  intrigues  of  designing  men. 
Bowles  was  looking  at  one  object,  and  his  be 
trayers  at  another.  They  meant  treason  and 
revolution.  He  was  dazzled  by  the  glittering 
bauble  of  compromise,  which  he  hoped  to  in 
augurate  by  some  kind  of  associated  action. 
Is  this  not  a  more  rational  explanation  of  his 
conduct,  than  the  harsh  and  incre4ible  one 
offered  by  the  Government?  He  was  always 
as  simple  about  it  as  a  child,  and  is  to  this 
day,  for  he  can  see  no  crime  in  a  compromise, 
nor  in  the  means  to  accomplish  it;  and  this 
was  all  the  use  he  had  for  the  order.  Mr. 
Harrison  knew  Bowles  simply  as  a  member  of 
the  Council,  and  Major-General  by  appoint 
ment.  Bingham  only  knew  him  as  such. 
Dodd  insisted  on  making  him  a  Major-Gen 
eral.  He  refused  and  protested  until  the  law 
was  modified  to  suit  his  views.  He  was  a  man 
of  considerable  fortune.  The  Bullitts,  the 
Dodds  and  the  Barretts  were  poor  and  needy. 
It  seems  to  have  been  a  matter  of  indifference 
with  them,  and  their  tools,  whether  they  lined 
their  pockets  with  rebel  money,  or  money 
from  the  coifers  of  Bowles.  Stidger  was  sent, 
time  and  again,  by  Bullitt  to  Bowles,  to  mis 
lead  and  betray  him.  Bowles  always  received 
him  without  asking  or  caring  whether  he  was 
a  member  of  the  order  or  not.  What  motive 
had  Bullitt  and  Stidger,  but  to  mislead  him 
into  complicity  with  treason?  Bowles  was 
passive — they  were  active.  They  even  sought 
to  commit  the  old  man  to  a  sanction  of  the 
assassination  of  Coffin.  Bowles  knew  Coffin, 
and  would  not  credit  the  imputation  upon  his 
fidelity,  but  finally  promised  to  put  men  on 
his  track,  to  watch  him. 

Behold  this  simple  old  man,  beset  by  Coffin 
and  Stidger,  two  Government  spies,  and  also 
by  Dodd,  Bullitt  and  others,  of  the  revolution 
ary  type!  Men  less  credulous  and  infirm 
than  Bowles  would  have  fallen  before  such  a 
combined  assault.  Dodd  and  his  Kentucky 
revolutionary  schemers  could  not  rest  until 
they  forced  a  major-general's  commission  on 
Bowles;  and  to  do  which,  Dodd  caused  the 
county  of  Orange  to  be  thrown  into  another 
district,  to  make  him  eligible.  And  now,  that 
one  set  of  them  have  got  him  on  trial  for  his 
life,  another  set — Heffren  and  Wilson — who 
purchased  their  safety  at  the  price  of  dis 
honor,,  broken  faith  and  violated  pledges,  by 


exchanging  the  dock  for  the  confessional — 
the  soldier's  home  for  the  witness  stand — and 
swearing  Bowles  into  deep  trouble,  and  them 
selves  out;  now  scuttle  the  ship,  and  leave  old 
age,  blighted  hope  and  ruined  fortune  to  buffet 
the  waves  alone.  Heft'ren's  testimony  was 
like  the  mountain  avalanche  of  snow — small  in 
the  beginning,  but  gathering  size  and  mo 
mentum  as  it  rolls,  until  it  sweeps  down  in  its 
course  every  obstruction  in  its  path.  Heft'ren's 
testimony  swept  down,  not  only  Bowles,  but 
Dodd,  Wilson  and  Walker,  and  buried  himself, 
finally,  in  the  common  ruin.  Wilson,  not  to 
be  outdone  by  Heffren,  comes  upon  the  witness 
stand,  redolent  with  the  savory  odors  of  the 
Chicago  conclave,  with  forty  dollars  of  rebel 
money  in  his  pocket,  obtained  from  Barrett  as 
mileage,  and  a  thousand  dollars,  obtained 
from  Bowles,  to  buy  arms,  and  strikes  Bowles 
and  Heffren  "lick  about,"  For  history  not  to 
know  and  record  the  transcendent  virtues  of 
these  two  defunct  witnesses,  were  to  rob  pos 
terity  of  half  of  its  inheritance.  History  has 
already  appropriated  them. 

I  can  understand  and  appreciate  how  an 
honest  man  may  join  a  treasonable  order  un 
wittingly,  and  on  discovering  its  true  char 
acter,  abandon  and  expose  it,  in  the  interest 
of  law  and  public  liberty — I  can  understand 
also  the  reasoning  and  casuistry  by  which  a 
detective  reconciles  his  deceptions  arid  bad 
faith  with  his  paramount  duty  to  society  and 
stable  Government — but  I  confess  nothing  but 
loathing  and  detestation  for  one  who  is  parti- 
ceps  criminis,  and  so  continues,  until  the  trial 
proves  his  guilt,  and  then  virtuously  con 
cludes  to  save  himself,  and  ruin  his  accom 
plices. 

It  is  proper  that  I  should  say,  in  behalf  of 
all  the  accused,  that.there  is  an  inconvenient 
redundancy  of  testimony,  given  on  this  trial, 
which  is  not  evidence,  for  the  reason  that  it 
does  not  support  any  issue — that  it  is  mere 
political  scandal.  I  allude  to  it  simply  that 
the  Court  may  detect  it,  and  dismiss  it  from 
consideration.  There  is  another  item  of  testi 
mony  affecting  Colonel  Bowles  that  I  will 
allude  to.  Hcffreu  swears  that  he  understood 
from  Wilson,  that  Dodd  and  Walker  received 
one  hundred  thousand  dollars,  each,  of  rebel 
money,  and  that  Bowles  got  his  share.  This 
is  a<-great  wrong  to  Colonel  Bowles,  if  false, 
yet  the  Government  did  not  ask  Wilson 
whether  it  was  true  or  not.  Heff'rcn  left  the 
impression  that  the  thousand  dollars  handed 
to  Wilson  by  Bowles,  was  part  of  this  corrup 
tion  fund — but  Wilson  virtually  denies  the 
whole  story,  by  declaring  that  it  was  of 
Bowies'  private  funds — thus  these  witnesses 
contradict  themselves — but  when  dishonored 
by  apostasy,  who  can  believe  them,  even  when 
they  corroborate  each  other  ?  Heft'ren  swears 
that  Wilson  told  him  thus  and  so — Wilson 
swears  that  Bowles  told  him  thus  and  so. 
According  to  Stidger,  there  were  two  other 
gentlemen  in  this  plot  against  Colonel 
Bowles — General  Carrington  and  Captain  S. 
E.  Jones,  of  Louisville — they  first  sent  Stidger 
as  a  spy  to  Bowles.  Stidger  also  played  the 
spy  on  Heffren,  at  Salem,  as  he  swears — all  of 
which  is  denied  by  Heffren.  So  Bowles  has 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLJS. 


235 


been,  and  is,  confronted  by  the  military  pow 
er,  the  detective  police  of  the  country,  and 
all  the  apostates  of  the  State's  evidence  depart 
ment. 

Stidger  swears  to  two  interviews  with  Heff- 
ren  at  Salem — Heffreu  denies  having  ever 
Been  Stidger  at  Salem.  Heffren,  in  turn,  un 
dertakes  to  swear  to  an  interview  with  Bock- 
ing,  the  Greek  fire  man,  at  Salem — Booking, 
this  Court  will  remember,  denies  having  ever 
been  in  Salem — thus,  when  the  Government 
witnesses  arc  at  variance  on  the  most  vital 
points  in  the  case,  Bowles  may  well  exclaim, 
"  Whern  rogues  fall  out,  honest  men  get  their 
dues,''  Stidger's  accomplishments  as  a  detec 
tive  are  only  equaled  by  his  accomplishments 
as  a  witness — he  is  both  artistic  and  estheti- 
'cal  in  each  character,  and,  I  am  inclined  to 
think,  without  an  amateur.  My  opinion  is,  if 
Bowles  were  liberated  to-day,  and  at  home, 
that  these  corrupt  and  belligerent  witnesses 
could,  by  their  blandishments,  ingratiate  them 
selves  again  into  his  confidence.  My  amateur 
witness,  Mr.  Stidger,  has  a  marvelous  story 
about  Bowles,  Booking  and  Greek  fire.  He 
astonishes  us  all  by  detailing  a  meeting  at 
the  Louisville  Hotel,  when  Dr.  Kalfus,  Colonel 
Bowles  and  others  met  Booking  and  others,  and 
heard  an  explanation  of  the  infernal  mysteries 
of  shells  and  Greek  fire.  The  eifect  of  all  this 
was  greatly  hightened  by  an  exhibition,  before 
this  Court,  of  shells,  grenades,  etc.,  as  if  the 
globe  itself  could,  and  would  be  exploded  by 
this  infernal  machine.  This  engine  of  univer 
sal  destruction,  says  Stidger,  was  under  the  su 
pervision  and  patronage  of  this  order.  Bowles 
profaned  the  Sabbath  with  Booking,  in  a  base 
ment  in  this  city,  experimenting  with  Greek 
fire,  says  Stidger.  Booking  swears,  the  Court 
will  recollect,  that  he  never  met  Bowles  in  this 
city,  on  any  such  business — that  he  did  exhibit 
his  invention  at  the  Louisville  Hotel,  when 
Bowles  and  others  were  present — but  that 
neither  Bowles  nor  any  one  else  ever  furnished 
money  to  send  him  to  Canada — that  two  hun 
dred  dollars  were  handed  him  in  Louisville  by 
a  young  man  to  meet  his  pressing  wants — that 
his  invention  was,  in  no  sense,  at  any  time, 
under  the  direction,  interest,  patronage,  or 
favor  of  this  order — thus  flatly  contradicting 
Stidger  in  toto,  and  Heifren  in  part.  Booking 
swears  that  the  invention  claimed  by  him, 
was  as  open  and  public  as  the  sunlight.  He 
had  filed  a  caveat  at  Washington,  and  under 
General  Burnside's  order,  he  came  to  Indian 
apolis,  and  brought  it  to  the  notice  of  the 
Governor,  General  Wilcox,  and  others,  as  he 
had  done  in  other  States.  Thus,  this  specter, 
which  seemed  so  fearful  and  ghostly,  at  one 
time,  vanishes  into  thin  air,  and  Colonel 
Bowles  is  relieved  of  another  incubus  which 
amateur  swearing  had  placed  on  his  vitals. 
Stidger  attempts  to  damage  Colonel  Bowles 
still  further,  by  swearing  that  Bowles  said 
he  had  communication  with  rebels  South. 
This,  I  venture,  is  all  moonshine,  like  the 
rest.  But  after  all  Stidger's  bold  fancies,  and 
his  equivocal  truths,  he  has  not  the  effrontery 
to  say  that  Bowles  ever  concurred  in,  assented 
to,  or  acted  upon  Dodd's  scheme  of  insurrec 
tion  ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  he  refused  to  have 


any  thing  to  do  with  it,  except  on  conditions 
which  never  happened,  and  could  not  happen, 
and  this  refusal  of  Colonel  Bowles  proves  that 
no  such  scheme  was  agreed  on  at  Chicago, 
and  that  he  refused  to  agree  upon  any  with 
Dodd  at  Indianapolis.  No  other  witness 
attempts  to  connect  Bowles  with  any  actual 
conspiracy,  and  he  falls  short  in  the  very  es 
sential  point  of  consent  and  agreement.  If 
Bowles  had  his  o\vn  method  and  plan  of  bring 
ing  about  the  compromise  between  the  two 
sections,  and  Dodd  and  Bullitt  dissented,  that 
was  their  fault,  and  not  the  fault  of  Colonel 
Bowles.  Then  if  Colonel  Bowles  is  not  guilty 
of  any  of  the  charges,  by  reason  of  the  Greek 
fire  phantom — by  holding  correspondence 
with  the  public  enemy — by  arming  the  people 
for  resistance  to  public  authority — by  contri 
buting  money  to  Booking — by  joining  Dodd 
in  his  wild  schemes — nor  by  receiving  a  part 
of  the  rebel  funds — nor  by  agreeing  at  Chicago, 
or  elsewhere,  to  an  uprising — then  he  must 
be  acquitted  on  every  charge,  unless,  indeed, 
his  membership  in  the  order  convicts  him — 
but  this  latter  proposition  is  without  either 
authority  orreason  tosupportit.  So  if  Colonel 
Bowles  be  convicted,  it  must  be  either,  first,  by 
force  of  the  guilty  character  of  the  order, 
which  would  be  monstrous — or  secondly,  by 
force  of  the  statements  and  declarations  of 
members  of  the  ord^r,  vague  and  distorted  by 
bad  memory,  and  made  veracity — or  thirdly, 
by  force  of  the  testimony  of  spies  and  detec 
tives,  equally  supported  and  contradicted,  by 
professedly  guilty  accomplices,  who  purchase 
immunity  from  punishment  by  turning  State's 
evidence.  Will  the  Court  be  satisfied  with  a 
conviction  on  such  testimony  ?  According  to 
the  law  books,  it  is  a  very  dangerous  charac 
ter  of  testimony.  And  when  it  is  considered 
that  you  must  find  the  defendants  guilty  be 
yond  a  reasonable  doubt — and  guilty  of  every 
essential  element  of  the  offense,  without  a 
reasonable  doubt — Colonel  Bowles  feels  strong 
in  the  law  and  the  evidence — though  feeble 
with  disease,  and  infirm  with  age. 

The  Court  will  not  fail  to  take  notice,  that 
the  Government,  the  better  to  secure  the  con 
viction  of  these  defendants,  has  not  only 
pressed  into  the  service  accomplices,  who 
prove  themselves  to  be  more  guilty  than  most 
of  those  remaining  on  trial,  but  avails  itself 
also  of  the  labor  and  testimony  of  detectives, 
spies,  and  informers.  He  must  be  an  innocent 
man  indeed,  or  a  prodigy  of  skill  and  man 
agement,  or  a  miracle  of  luck,  under  a  special 
Providence,  who  can  escape  from  the  meshes 
and  machinations  of  such  a  formidable  horde 
of  accomplices,  informers,  detectives  and  spies. 
By  the  indulgence  of  the  Court,  I  avail  myself 
of  the  opinion  of  an  eminent  English  histo 
rian,  who  described  a  late  period  of  English 
history,  in  order  to  fix  the  moral  and  legal 
status  of  such  witnesses,  on  the  present  trial, 
and  in  addition  to  which,  I  shall  not  offer  any 
observations  of  my  own — further  than  to  say, 
that  the  law  of  evidence  holds  spies,  detec 
tives,  informers,  accomplices,  and  those  who 
turn  State's  evidence,  in  very  great  detesta 
tion;  and  while  such  witnesses  are  competent, 
very  little  credit  is  given  their  testimony.  I 


236 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


quote  from  May's  Constitutional  History  of  Eng 
land  : 

"Next  in  importance  to  personal  freedom,  is 
immunity  from  suspicious  and  jealous  obser 
vations.  Men  may  be  without  any  restraint 
upon  their  liberty ;  they  may  pass  to  and  fro 
at  pleasure;  but  if  their  steps  are  tracked  by 
spies  and  informers,  their  words  noted  down 
for  crimination,  their  associates  watched  as 
conspirators — who  shall  say  that  they  are 
free  ?  Nothing  is  more  revolting  to  English 
men  than  the  espionage  which  forms  part  of 
the  administration  system  of  continental  des 
potisms.  It  haunts  men  like  an  evil  genius, 
chills  their  gayety,  restrains  their  wit.  casts  a 
shadow  over  their  friendships,  arid  blights 
their  domestic  hearth.  The  freedom  of  a  coun 
try  may  be  measured  by  its  immunity  from 
this  baleful  agency.  Rulers  who  distrust 
their  own  people,  must  govern  in  a  spirit  of 
absolutism  ;  and  suspected  subjects  will  ever 
be  sensible  of  their  own  wrongs. 

"Our  own  countrymen  have  been  compara 
tively  free  from  this  hateful  interference  with 
their  moral  freedom.  Yet  we  may  find  many 
traces  of  a  system  repugnant  to  the  liberal 
policy  of  our  laws.  In  1764  we  see  spies  fol 
lowing  Wilkes  every-where,  dogging  his  steps 
like  shadows,  and  reporting  every  movement 
of  himself  and  his  friends  to  the  Secretaries  of 
State.  Nothing  was  too  insignificant  for  the 
curiosity  of  these  exalted  magistrates.  Every 
visit  he  paid  or  received  throughout  the  day 
was  noted;  the  persons  he  chanced  to  encoun 
ter  on  the  streets  were  not  overlooked;  it  was 
known  where  he  dined,  or  went  to  church,  and 
at  what  hour  he  returned  home  at  night. 

"In  the  State  trials  (England)  of  1794,  we 
discover  spies  arid  informers  in  the  witness 
box,  who  had  been  active  members  of  politi 
cal  societies,  sharing  their  councils,  and  en 
couraging,  if  not  prompting  their  criminal 
extravagance.  And  throughout  that  period  of 
dread  and  suspicion,  society  was  every-where 
infested  with  espionage. 

"Again,  in  1817,  Government  spies  were 
deeply  compromised  in  the  turbulence  and  se 
dition  of  that  period.  Castle,  a  spy  of  infa 
mous  character,  having  uttered  the  most  sedi 
tious  language,  and  incited  the  people  to  arm, 
proved  in  the  witness-box  the  very  crimes  he 
had  himself  prompted  and  encouraged.  An 
other  spy,  named  Oliver,  ^proceeded  into  the 
disturbed  districts,  in  the  character  of  a  Lon 
don  delegate,  and  remained  for  many  weeks 
amongst  the  deluded  operatives,  every-where 
instigating  them  to  rise  and  arm.  He  en 
couraged  them  with  hopes  that,  in  the  event 
of  a  rising,  they  would  be  assisted  by  a  hun 
dred  and  fifty  thousand  men  in  the  metropo 
lis;  and  thrusting  himself  into  their  society, 
he  concealed  the  craft  of  a  spy  under  the  dis 
guise  of  a  traitorous  conspirator.  Before  he 
undertook  this  shameful  mission  he  was  in 
communication  with  the  Ministers,  and 
throughout  his  mischievous  progress  was  cor 
responding  with  the  Government  or  its  agents. 
There  is  little  doubt  that  Oliver  did  more  to 
disturb  the  public  peace  by  his  malign  influ 
ence,  than  to  protect  it  by  timely  information 
to  the  Government.  The  agent  was  mischiev 


ous,  and  his  principals  could  not  wholly  es 
cape  the  blame  of  his  misdeeds.  To  the  sever 
ity  of  oppressive  measures  and  a  vigorous 
administration  of  the  law,  was  added  the  re 
proach  of  a  secret  alliance  between  the  Exec 
utive  and  a  wretch  who  had  at  once  bought 
and  betrayed  his  victims. 

"The  relations  between  the  Government  and 
its  informers  are  of  extreme  delicacy.  Not  to 
profit  by  timely  information  were  a  crime,  but 
to  retain  in  Government  pay,  and  to  reward 
spies  and  informers  who  consort  with  conspir 
ators  as  their  sworn  accomplices,  and  encour 
age  while  they  betray  them  in  their  crimes, 
is  a  practice  for  which  no  plea  can  be  ofiercd. 
j  No  Government,  indeed,  can  be  supposed  to 
[  have  expressly  instructed  its  spies  to  instigate 
the  perpetration  of  crimes;  but  to  be  unsus 
pected,  every  spy  must  be  zealous  in  the  cause 
which  he  pretends  to  have  espoused;  and  his 
zeal  in  a  criminal  enterprise  is  a  direct  en 
couragement  of  crime.  So  odious  is  (and 
should  be)  the  character  of  a  spy  (or  informer) 
that  his  ignominy  is  shared  by  his  employers, 
against  whom  the  public  feeling  has  never 
failed  to  pronounce  itself,  in  proportion  to  the 
infamy  of  the  agent  and  the  complicity  of 
those  whom  he  served." 

It  has  always  been  my  habit  in  criminal  tri 
als,  whatever  I  may  have  thought  of  the  prob 
abilities  of  conviction,  to  address  the  jury  on 
the  contingent  measure  of  punishment,  and  at 
the  hazard  of  misconstruction,  1  will  invite 
your  attention  to  that  question.  You,  gentle 
men,  unlike  the  common  law  tribunals,  arc 
neither  limited  in  the  range  of  your  juris 
diction,  rior  circumscribed  in  the  measure  of 
your  punishments.  The  Constitution  of  the 
United  States  furnishes  no  guide  other  than 
the  injunction,  that  cruel  and  unusual  pun 
ishments  shall  not  be  inflicted,  nor  excessive 
fines  imposed — even  if  this  inhibition  applies 
to  tribunals  organized  under  the  laws  of  war — 
upon  which  there  might  be  great  differences 
of  opinion  among  fair-minded  men — since 
many  military  punishments  are  unusual  and 
unknown  to  the  common  law  courts.  The 
Constitution  of  the  State  of  Indiana,  in  a 
spirit  of  recognition  of,  and  homage  to,  the 
advanced  and  advancing  state  of  criminal 
jurisprudence,  in  the  Christian  world,  pro 
vides  that  "cruel  and  unusual  punishments 
shall  not  be  inflicted" — and  that  the  "penal 
code  shall  be  founded  on  the  principles  of 
reformation,  not  of  vindictive  justice."  All 
penalties  shall  be  proportioned  to  the  nature 
of  the  "offense."  These  provisions  are  alike 
mandatory  to  courts  and  legislators,  and  em 
brace,  if  not  in  their  letter,  at  least  in  their 
spirit,  all  citizens  and  all  tribunals.  But  it  is 
unworthy  of  any  tribunal,  in  court  or  camp, 
in  church  or  State,  to  make  vindictive  justice 
the  measure  of  punishment.  Punishment  in 
the  State  has  the  same  wise  ends  in  view,  and 
the  same  restraints  and  proprieties,  upon  its 
indulgence,  as  in  the  family  circle — not  to 
gratify  revenge — not  in  the  spirit  of  execra 
tion,  for  the  kind  of  crime  of  which  he  is  convict 
ed — nor  to  punish  the  offender  in  the  name  of 
one  crime,  for  a  great  many  other  short-com 
ings,  for  which  the  law  had  fixed  no  penalty 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


237 


By  the  act  of  Congress  of  July  17,  1802, 
death — or  in  the  discretion  of  the  Court,  im 
prisonment,  for  a  period  of  not  less  than  five 
years,  and  not  less  than  ten  thousand  dollars 
fine — is  imposed  for  the  crime  of  treason. 

For  the  crime  of  putting  on  foot  insurrec 
tion,  and  giving  aid  and  comfort  to  rebels,  the 
game  act  prescribes  imprisonment  not  exceed 
ing  ten  years,  or  by  fine  not  exceeding  ten 
thousand  dollars,  or  by  both.  And  for  either 
of  these  offenses,  a  confiscation  of  all  prop 
erty  follows.  These  two  offenses  are  embraced 
in  the  accusation  against  the  accused.  It  is 
also  provided  by  the  act  of  Congress  of  July 
31,  1861,  that  the  offense  of  conspiracy  shall 
be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than  five 
hundred  dollars  nor  more  than  five  thousand 
dollars,  or  by  imprisonment,  with  or  without 
hard  labor,  as  the  court  shall  determine,  for  a 
period  of  not  less  than  six  months,  nor  greater 
than  six  years,  or  by  both.  This  is  also  one 
of  the  offenses  embraced  in  the  accusation 
ftgairist  all  the  accused.  The  other  two  offenses, 
of  "inciting  insurrection, "  and  "disloyal 
practices,"  are  not  defined  or  punished  by  any 
act  of  Congress,  and  you  must  look  for  the 
penalties,  when  you  look  for  the  law. 

Now,  it  may  be  argued,  that  as  this  Court 
derives  its  jurisdiction  to  try  common  law  of 
fenses  from  the  laws  of  war,  that  you  will 
look  to  the  laws  of  war  for  the  definition  of 
crimes,  and  the  fixation  of  their  penalties. 
There  is  some  force  in  this  argument,  I  admit — 
but  it  carries  a  crushing  retroactive  stroke  of 
logic  against  the  jurisdiction  itself.  For  if 
the  jurisdiction  rests  on  no  law — and  all 
crimes  and  penalties  are  to  be  looked  for 
among  the  dim  and  stained  repositories  of  the 
laws  of  war,  or  among  the  fickle,  ubiquitous, 
but  unknown  fountains  of  martial  law — then 
we  have  lost  our  foothold  on  the  terra  firma  of 
law,  and  have  become  the  sport  of  the  winds 
and  waves  that  are  bearing  us,  at  this  time, 
to  an  unknown  shore.  The  latitude  and  long 
itude  of  judicial  navigation  are  lost — inno 
cence  has  no  sure  protection,  and  guilt  no  cer 
tain  punishment — might  gives  right — law 
hides  itself,  and  justice  is  measured  by  the 
strength  and  will  of  the  tribunal  and  the  de 
fenseless  condition  of  the  accused.  This  is 
abstract  argument,  not  intended  for  this  Court, 
whose  courtesy  and  justice,  thus  far,  we  have 
had  so  much  reason  to  commend.  But  at  least, 
if  conscience  demands  the  conviction  of  one 
or  more  of  the  accused,  it  would  be  a  conso 
lation  and  a  shield  of  justification,  hereafter, 
when  our  political  skies  have  cleared  away,  to 
know,  that  if  you  could  point  to  no  statute 
for  your  jurisdiction,  that  you  could  for  the 
crime  and  its  penalty. 

The  true  criterion,  doubtless,  is  that  medial 
line,  which  by  its  severity — but  more  by  its 
certainty — deters  the  incorrigible,  and  reforms 
the  penitent  offender — while  its  cruelty  and, 


I  vindictiveness  do  not  give  a  greater  shock  to 
I  the  public  sense  than  did  the  crime  for  which 
he  is  punished— and  create  a  synipathy  for  the 
offender  and  horror  for  the  Court.  These  are 
unfavorable  times  for  the  admeasurement  of 
punishment,  all  must  admit,  where  the  offense, 
or  the  offender,  has  to  stem  the  sirocco  breath 
of  our  nation's  present  heavy  breathings.  The 
outside  current  is  strong  against  the  secret  or 
der  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty,  and  if  a  defense  of 
the  accused  necessarily  involved  a  defense  of 
the  order,  as  a  political  institution,  I  should 
despair  of  the  task.  Time,  and  a  very  limited 
exercise  of  reason,  will  make  plain  to  the 
popular  mind,  as  it  has  already  to  this 
Court,  I  trust,  the  difference  between  the  crim 
inality  of  the  order,  and  the  criminality  of  par 
ticular  members,  at  remote  distances  from  each 
other.  And  when  this  mingled  pageant  of 
bright  bayonets  and  bloody  horrors — of  mil 
itary  victories  and  political  defeats — of  rival 
military  and  civil  courts — shall  have  passed 
away — and  when  reason  shall  dethrone  pas 
sion,  and  when  this  great  nation,  with  gar 
ments  now  bathed  in  blood,  shall  lift  her  head 
above  the  clouds,  and  clothe  herself  again  in 
the  majesty  of  law — may  we  have  no  record  of 
these  cases,  that  we  or  posterity  will  blush  to 
read.  When  the  unclouded  intellect  of  the 
nation  is  again  supreme,  in  its  sway,  much 
of  the  work,  besides  that  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty, 
to  which  prejudice  and  malignity  are  now  de 
voted,  will  not  receive  the  sanction,  even,  of 
popular  approval. 

Now,  Mr.  President,  and  gentlemen  of  the 
Commission,  my  task  is  done,  whilst  yours,  in 
its  gravest  responsibility,  is  before  you. 
Humphreys  has  an  unblemished  character, 
the  growth  of  many  sacrifices,  and  the  exer 
cise  of  many  virtues — he  has  a  career  of  honor 
and  usefulness  among  men,  in  the  future — he 
has  an  interesting  family,  whose  fate,  fortune 
and  happiness  are  involved  in  his  own — he 
has  a  noble,  dauntless,  unbroken  spirit,  which 
he  would  not  exchange  for  that  of  all  his 
accusers — he  has  life,  liberty  and  happiness — 
all  staked  on  the  issue;  and  I  commit  them 
all  to  your  keeping. 

And  here  is  Colonel  Bowles,  sobered  alike 
by  age  and  the  solemnity  of  the  crisis  that  has 
overtaken  him — with  a  frame  bowed,  some 
what,  by  the  storms  of  life — intimately  iden 
tified  with  the  past  legislative  and  military 
history  of  our  State — soon,  in  the  course  of 
nature,  nothing  will  remain  of  him  but  his 
memory — he  fondly  hopes  that  his  memory  is 
not  to  be  blackened  by  the  stigma  of  convic 
tion — his  family  and  friends  will  gather 
around  his  grave,  and  protect  that  memory, 
when  dead,  if  you  will  shield  it  while  living. 
You  might  convict  and  remove  him,  but  great 
abuses,  bad  laws,  and  defective  institutions, 
would  still  remain.  I  commend  him  to  your 
mercy. 


ARGUMENT  OF  JOHN  R.  COFFROTH, 


IN    DEFENSE    OP 


L.    P.    MILLIOAN. 


Mr.  President  and  Gentlemen  of  the  Commission: 

I  am  counsel  for  Mr.  Milligan  alone.  My 
argument,  therefore,  will  be  more  especially 
directed  to  matters  which  concern  his  defense. 

These  defendants  are  on  joint  trial;  their 
motion  for  separate  trials  having  been  denied 
them  by  this  Commission.  That  matter  is 
passed,  and  I  do  not  wish  to  refer  te  it  com- 
plainingly — propriety  forbids  it;  but,  as  an 
act  of  truth,  as  well  as  of  simple  justice  to  my 
client,  it  is  my  duty  to  state,  most  solemnly, 
that  that  refusal  has  most  materially  and 
vitally  embarrassed  and  prejudiced  his  de 
fense.  Evidence  of  the  most  vital  importance 
to  him  was  not  introduced  from  the  selfish  op 
position  of  a  co-defendant,  induced  by  the  fear 
that  that  evidence  might  remotely  affect  him. 
We  yielded  to  that  opposition,  even  to  the 
prejudice  of  my  client's  good  name,  beyond 
which,  in  this  trial,  he  has  but  little  concern. 

By  the  common  law  of  practice,  a  separate 
trial  of  persons  jointly  charged  with  a  felony, 
has  been  rarely  refused,  even  in  cases  where 
the  accused  were  charged  with  the  commission 
of  a  single  act,  committed  at  the  same  time 
and  place ;  while  in  this,  and  many  other 
States,  the  separate  trial  of  persons,  jointly 
indicted  for  a  felony,  is  expressly  guaranteed 
by  statute.  I  only  refer  to  this  matter  in  ex 
planation  of  our  silence  on  points  upon  which 
we  otherwise  should  have  been  heard  "trumpet- 
tongued"  by  the  evidence. 

This  is  a  remarkable  case,  not  only  in  its 
inception,  but  in  its  progress.  Strange  lights 
have  gleamed  in  upon  us,  showing  the  baleful 
effects  of  partisan  selfishness  and  malice;  for 
this  cause  has  assumed  in  its  progress  more 
of  a  political  than  a  criminal  prosecution. 
You  are  sitting  in  judgment  upon  political 
opponents  for  alleged  political  offenses:  let 
the  histoi-y  of  the  past  admonish  you  against 
lending  a  too  willing  ear  to  what  may  be  the 
perjured  tale  of  accomplices,  paid  spies  or  in 
formers.  This  is  a  State  trial,  a  political 
trial;  and  in  all  such  trials,  the  tribunal  be 
fore  which  the  accused  are  immediately  held 
to  answer,  is  not  the  o^nly  one  that  sits  in 
judgment.  The  cause  before  this  tribunal  is 
ubout  to  close;  but  it  is  continued,  for  the 
sober  second  thought,  before  that  othef  self- 
correcting  tribunal — public  opinion — whose 
decree  frequently  reverses  the  first  hasty  de 
cision,  and  whose  final  judgment  is  most  gen 
erally  right.  It  is  true  that  that  final  judg 
ment  may  come  too  late  for  Mr.  Milligan,  but 
238 


his  children  will  reap  its  advantage.  "The 
mills  of  the  gods  grind  slowly,  but  they  grind 
exceedingly  fine."  I  shall  be  pardoned  for 
this  allusion,  if  it  be  remembered  that  it  is 
very  difficult  to  live  in  a  poisoned  atmosphere 
without  inhaling  a  portion  of  the  miasma. 

During  the  whole  progress  of  this  trial,  par 
tisan  hate,  with  blind  and  fiendish  malignity, 
has  been  demanding  blood.  In  many  of  the 
public  journals,  the  evidence  has  been  gar 
bled,  misrepresented  and  perverted,  and  then 
criticised — begetting  a  mad  fury  in  the  minds 
of  a  victorious  party,  dethroning  truth,  and 
making  us,  at  times,  tremble  for  fear  of  a  par 
tial  judgment.  But,  fortunately  for  the  cause 
of  justice,  during  the  lengthy  progress  of  the 
trial,  the  storm  has,  in  some  measure,  spent  its 
fury,  and  already  the  truth  begins  to  peep 
from  behind  the  cloud.  The  first  judgment  of 
that  other  tribunal  is  even  now  undergoing 
review.  The  voices  that  cried  "hosannah," 
afterward  shouted  "crucify;"  and  the  wild  ac 
claim  that  welcomed  the  return  of  King 
Charles,  and  proclaimed  the  Restoration,  came 
from  the  same  throats  that  had  howled  with 
savage  fury  for  his  blood. 

'YHearest  thou,"  he  said,  "  the  loud  acclaim, 
With  which  they  shout  the  Douglas1  name; 
With  like  acclaim  the  vulgar  throat 
Strained  for  King  James  their  morning  note  ; 
With  like  acclaim  they  hail'd  the  day 
When  first  I  hroke  the  Douglas'  sway; 
And  like  acclaim  would  Douglas  greet 
If  he  could  hurl  me  from  my  seat." 

The  first  question  in  order  that  presents 
itself,  in  the  consideration  of  this  cause,  is  as 
to  the  jurisdiction  of  this  military  tribunal  to 
try  these  defendants,  who  are  all  citizens  of 
Indiana,  and  in  no  wise  connected  with  the 
army  or  navy  of  the  United  States;  and, 
therefore,  entitled,  by  the  Federal  Constitu 
tion,  to  "a  speedy  and  public  trial,  by  an  im 
partial  jury  of  the  State  and  district  wherein 
the  crime  shall  have  been  committed,"  and  not 
by  such  a  tribunal  as  this  Commission,  com 
posed,  as  it  is,  of  citizens  of -Indiana,  Michi 
gan  and  Massachusetts.  But  this  question  of 
jurisdiction  has  been  so  ably  and  so  fully 
argued  by  my  learned  brother,  Gordon,  (who 
is  counsel  for  other  of  the  defendants,)  that 
any  further  elucidation  is  unnecessary,  if  not 
impossible;  for  the  whole  subject,  to  my  mind, 
has  been,  by  him,  most  learnedly  and  ex 
haustively  argued. 

Allow  me,  then,  at  once,  to  call  your  atten 
tion  to  the  charges,  and  to  the  evidence  in 


TREASON    TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


239 


support  of   them.      The   charges    are   as    fol 
lows: 

1.  Conspiracy  against  the  Government   of 
the  United  States. 

2.  Affording    aid    and    comfort    to    rebels 
against  the  authority  of  the  United  States. 

3.  Inciting  insurrection. 

4.  Disloyal  practices. 

5.  Violating  the  laws  of  war. 

The  gist  of  the  specification  to  these  charges 
may  be  thus  stated:  That  these  defendants  or 
ganized  and  disseminated,  and  were  members 
of  the  "Order  of  American  Knights,  or  Sons 
of  Liberty,"  which  was  both  civil  and  mili 
tary;  that  this  society  was  unlawful  and 
treasonable;  that  it  was  armed,  and  was  de 
signed  to  aid  the  rebels,  and  to  overthrow  the 
Government;  that  the  defendants  conspired 
with  Dodd,  and  others,  to  seize  certain  State 
and  United  States  Arsenals,  and  to  release  and 
arm  rebel  prisoners.  That  they  counseled  and 
incited  resistance  to  the  draft,  and  attempted 
to  introduce  the  enemies  of  the  United  States 
within  the  loyal  portions  thereof,  and  held 
communication  with  them. 

In  support  of  these  charges  and  specifica 
tions,  the  main  facts  proven  against  Mr.  Milli- 
gan  arc,  that  he  is  a  member  of  the  "Order  of 
American  Knights,  or  Sons  of  Liberty;"  that 
he  attended  two  Grand  Councils  of  the  society, 
held  at  Indianapolis,  the  one  in  November, 
1863,  and  the  other  in  June,  18G4;  and  that  he 
was  appointed  by  the  order  a  Ma.jor-General 
thereof.  Some  minor  matters  of  evidence  will 
be  noticed  in  the  course  of  this  argument. 
We  are,  therefore,  at  once  led  to  the  inquiry, 
was  the  Order  of  American  Knights  a  con 
spiracy  per  se,  and  was  it  treasonable? 

"A  conspiracy  is  a  corrupt  agreeing  together, 
by  two  or  more,  to  do,  by  concerted  action, 
something  unlawful,  either  as  a  means  or  an 
end."  2  Bishop  Grim.  Law,  §  149.  The  legality 
of  the  agreement,  then,  becomes  a  pertinent 
question  in  this  branch  of  our  inquiry,  or, 
rather,  the  illegality  of  the  act  or  acts  that  are 
agreed  to  be  done.  It,  therefore,  becomes 
necessary  to  institute  a  careful  examination  of 
the  several  acts  that  the  "Sons  of  Liberty" 
agreed  to  do;  and,  first,  let  us  look  at  the 
ground  work  of  that  society — at  its  declara 
tion  of  principles. 

And,  while  reading,  I  ask  you  to  forget,  for 
the  time  being,  that  they  are,  in  any  way,  con 
nected  with  the  Sons  of  Liberty,  and  then  let 
us  ask  ourselves  what  part  we  will  condemn. 

"DECLARATION  OP  PRINCIPLES. 

"1st.  Essence  Ethereal,  Eternal,  Supreme — 
by  us  called  God — hath  created,  pervades  and 
controls  the  universe!  dwells  in  man,  and  is 
the  DIVINITY  within  him. 

"Sponsors — Amen. 

"2d.  All  men  are  endowed  by  the  Creator 
with  certain  rights,  equal  only  so  far  as  there  is 
equality  in  the  capacity  for  the  appreciation, 
enjoyment  and  exercise  of  those  rights,  some 
of  which  are  inalienable,  while  others  may, 
by  voluntary  act  or  consent,  be  qualified,  sus 
pended  or  relinquished,  for  the  purpose  of  social 
governmental  organization,  or  may  be  taken 
away  from  the  individual  by  the  supremacy  of 


the  law  which  he  himself  hath  ordained,  in 
conjunction  with  his  fellows,  for  their  mutual 
protection  and  %dvaricement  toward  perfect 
civilization. 

"3d.  Government  arises  from  the  necessities 
of  a  well  organized  society. 

"4th.  Right  government  derives  its  sole  au 
thority  from  the  will  of  the  governed,  expressly 
declared.  [  The  majority  should  express  such  will  in 
the.  mode  which  the  unanimous  voice  shall  approve, 
always  guaranteeing  to  each  individual,  unless  he 
shall  have  been  restrained  by  the  law,  the  privilege 
and  opportunity  to  make  known  his  opinion  and 
express  his  will  in  regard  to  all  matters  relating  or 
pertaining  to  the  Government. ] 

"5th.  The  grand  purpose  of  government  is 
the  welfare  of  the  governed;  its  success  is 
measured  by  the  degree  of  progress,  which 
the  people  shall  have  attained  to  the  most  ex 
alted  civilization. 

"  Gth.  Government  founded  on  the  princi 
ples  enunciated  in  the  foregoing  propositions 
is  designated  Democracy.  The  division  of  a 
Territory,  where  it  exists,  is  usually  called  a 
REPUBLIC,  sometimes  a  STATE. 

"7th.  Reflection,  observation  and  experience 
seem  to  have  established,  in  the  minds  of  wise 
and  impartial  men,  the  conclusion  that  '•De 
mocracy,1  properly  organized  upon  the  great 
principles  which  our  Revolutionary  ancestors, 
patriots  and  sages,  held,  inculcated  and  de 
fended,  best  achieved  the  grand  and  munifi 
cent  end  of  human  government. 

"8th.  The  Government  organized  and  ex 
isting  in  the  original  thirteen  States  of  North 
America,  when  they  had  severally  and  unitedly 
renounced  their  allegiance  to  the  Government 
of  Great  Britain,  and  dissolved  their  former 
colonial  relations,  we  regard  as  the  wisest  and 
best  adapted  to  the  nature  and  character  of 
the  people  inhabiting  the  continent  of  North 
America  at  the  present  day.  Under  the  be 
nign  influence  of  that  Government  a  nation 
has  arisen,  and  attained  a  degree  of  power 
and  splendor  which  has  no  parallel  in  the 
history  of  the  human  race. 

"9th.  The  Government  designated  'The 
United  States  of  America,'  which  blazons  the 
historic  page,  and  shed  its  light  along  the 
path  of  future  ages,  was  the  transcendent 
conception  and  mighty  achievement  of  wis 
dom,  enlightened  patriotism  and  virtue,  which 
appear  to  have  passed  from  earth  amidst  the 
fading  glories  of  the  golden  era,  which  they 
illustrated  with  immortal  splendor.  That 
Government  was  created  originally  by  thirteen 
free,  sovereign  and  independent  States,  for  their 
mutual  benefit,  to  administer  the  affairs  of 
their  common  interest  and  concern;  being  en 
dowed  with  the  powers,  dignity  and  su 
premacy,  and  no  further,  or  other,  which  arc 
distinctly  specified,  and  warranted,  and  con 
ferred  by  the  strict  letter  of  the  immortal 
compact — the  Constitution  of  the  United  States. 

"  Sponsors — Amen." 

I  ask  you  to  read  this  declaration  of  princi 
ples,  and  to  examine  them  closely.  Are  they 
not,  so  far  as  they  have  any  signification,  the 
very  principles  upon  which  our  Government 
was  administered  in  the  "better  days  of  the 


240 


TREASON  TRIALS  AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


Republic,"  when  it  was  in  the  very  noontide 
of  its  prosperity  and  glory  ;  and  which  have 
canonized  their  authors  as  the  apostles  of  civil 
liberty  in  America  ?  Which  one  of  those 
principles  is  it  unlawful  to  hold,  inculcate 
and  defend  ?  But  I  pass  from  them  as  need 
ing  no  comment. 

But,  perhaps,  the  obligations  of  the  order 
are  thought  to  be  objectionable  ?  During  the 
progress  of  this  trial,  our  attention  has  been 
particularly  called  to  the  following  clause,  as 
the  only  obnoxious  one !  by  the  frequency 
with  which  it  has  been  read  to  the  witnesses  : 

"  I  do  further  swear  that  I  will,  at  all  times, 
if  needs  be,  take  up  arms  in  the  cause  of  the 
oppressed — in  my  own  country  first  of  all — 
against  any  monarch,  prince,  potentate,  power  or 
government  USURPED,  which  may  be  found  in 
arms,  waging  war  against  a  people  or  peoples, 
who  are  endeavoring  to  establish  or  have  in 
augurated  a  government  for  themselves,  in 
accordance  with,  and  founded  upon,  the  eter 
nal  principles  of  truth,  which  I  have  sworn 
in  the  Vestibule,  and  now  in  this  presence  do 
swear  to  maintain  inviolate  and  defend  with 
my  life." 

There  is  no  agreement  her§  to  do  a  particu 
lar  act ;  it  is  a  mere  promise,  upon  a  given 
case  which  may  never  arise — for  we  trust  that 
the  Government  will  not  adopt  the  necessity 
of  admitting  that  any  of  the  contingencies 
upon  which  this  obligation  presupposes  the 
taking  up  of  arms  as  necessary,  have  hap 
pened  or  do  exist,  or  that  there  is  even  a  prox 
imate  likelihood  of  their  happening — and 
which  the  accused  say,  by  their  action  and 
inaction,  have  not  happened.  Let  us  analyze 
this  pledge.  And  first,  who  were  they  to  take 
up  arms  against?  "A  monarch,  prince,  po 
tentate,  power,  or  government  usurped." 
Now,  we  feel  confident  that  we  may,  with 
propriety,  dismiss  all  the  objects  of  this  seem 
ing  warlike  proposition,  except  the  last,  for 
the  reason  that  we  can  not  believe  that  the 
Government  will  insist  that  in  this,  our  coun 
try,  "any  monarch  or  prince"  has  been 
"found  in  arms,"  etc.  We  will,  therefore,  con 
fine  our  remarks  to  the  last  proposition,  that 
is,  as  to  a  "power  or  government  usurped;" 
and  I  here  ask  the  learned  Judge  Advocate  if 
he  is  prepared  to  proclaim  to  the  world  that 
this  Government  is  a  usurped  one,  in  order  to 
make  this  obligation  to  take  up  arms  apply  to 
it?  The  declaration  would  be  as  startling  as 
any  that  the  defendants  are  charged  with. 

I  have  no  purpose  to  conceal  the  views  of 
Mr.  Milligan,  and  freely  admit  that  he  may 
have  said,  what  every  intelligent  man  in 
America  knows,  that  the  President,  the  Con 
gress,  and  the  military  authorities,  have  each 
and  all  exercised  particular  powers  that  did 
not  belong  to  them  ;  yet,  I  submit  that  he  is  a 
gentleman  of  too  much  intelligence  to  enter 
tain  or  express  the  opinion  that  our  Federal 
Government  is  an  usurped  one,  or  that  Mr. 
Lincoln  is  not  the  lawful  President,  elected 
according  to  the  forms  of  law,  and,  as  such, 
entitled  to  the  respect  due  to  his  station. 
True,  the  defendant  has  criticised  Mr.  Lin 
coln's  acts,  and  so  have  the  American  people, 
as  the3r  have  claimed  and  exercised  the  right 


to  criticise  the  acts  of  all  administrations 
since  our  existence  as  a  people,  Washington's 
not  excepted.  The  exercise  of  denied  powers, 
history  informs  us,  has  by  the  people  usually 
been  denominated  usurpations.  But,  I  trust, 
this  Commission  will  not  lose  sight  of  the  dis 
tinction  between  charging  a  legitimate  Gov 
ernment  with  exercising  powers  denied  to 
it — using  the  term  "usurp"  with  reference 
to  the  exercise  of  such  powers — and  charging 
a  Government  with  being  a  usurped  one.  But, 
if  any  one  should,  unfortunately  for  the  defense, 
be  of  opinion  that  the  Government  is  a  usurpa 
tion,  still  I  insist  that  neither  the  defendants 
as  individuals,  nor  the  Order  of  American 
Knights,  or  Sons  of  Liberty,  ever  entertained 
or  expressed  such  sentiments,  but  that  they 
have  ever  treated  the  Government,  including 
the  President,  the  Courts,  the  Congress,  and 
the  Army,  as  legitimate,  each  in  its  sphere. 
For  the  proof  of  this  I  appeal  to  their  acts. 
Where  has  that  order  taken  up  arms  or  made 
any  preparation  to  do  so,  either  by  organizing, 
arming  or  drilling  the  members  ?  But  it  is 
claimed  that  Mr.  Milligan,  in  public  speeches, 
advised  resistance  to  any  encroachment  upon 
the  elective  franchise.  Suppose  he  did ;  who 
would  not  and  be  a  man  ?  And  suppose  fur 
ther  that  he  expressed  the  opinion  that  these 
encroachments  would  come  from  the  army ! 
Yet,  will  it  be  assumed  that  such  encroach 
ments,  had  they  come,  would  have  been  the 
act  of  the  Government?  and  that  resistance 
to  such  encroachments  would  be  resistance  to 
the  Government?  If  so,  then  there  are  mil 
lions  of  men  aspiring  to  be  freemen,  who  are 
guilty  criminals,  deserving  the  fate  now 
threatened  these  defendants. 

That  this  obligation  did  not  contemplate  the 
taking  up  of  arms  against  the  Federal  Gov 
ernment,  is  fully  shown  by  the  fact  that  the 
order  did  not  take  up  ai-ms ;  rnor  was  any  re 
solve  or  movement  made  in  any  of  its  author 
ized  councils,  temples,  or  meetings,  to  do  so, 
but,  on  the  contrary,  the  evidence  of  Mr. 
Ibach  shows,  that  at  the  Grand  Council  of 
June,  1864,  on  a  resolution  being  introduced, 
pledging  the  order  to  resist  the  draft,  it  was 
promptly  and  with  great  unanimity  voted 
down ;  and  that  the  belligerent  gentleman 
who  introduced  the  resolution,  went  away 
much  dissatisfied  with  the  Order.  And  may 
he  not  have  been  some  bosom  friend  of  General 
Carrington,  a  la  Stidger  and  Zumro  ?  That 
there  may  have  been  persons  in  the  organiza 
tion  who  would  have  gazed  with  delight  upon 
the  torch  being  applied  that  should  kindle  the 
flames  of  civil  war,  and  who  hoped  to  find  a 
helping  hand  in  the  order,  I  do  not  deny;  but, 
from  the  evidence,  I  do  deny  that  the  order  had 
any  such  purpose.  Nor  is  the  order  respon 
sible  for  the  individual  acts  of  its  members, 
any  more  than  a  Church,  or  a  lodge  of  Masons, 
is  responsible  for  the  treasonable  acts  of  any 
or  even  all  of  its  members.  Mr.  Harrison  esti 
mates  the  number  of  the  order  in  Indiana  at 
18,000.  I  respectfully  ask  the  Judge  Advo 
cate  if  he  will  say,  that  that  mighty  host  are 
all  responsible  for  the  insane  ravings  and 
actions  of  Dodd  &  Co.,  and  therefore  traitors? 
If  so,  why  have  they  not  been  arrested  ?  Why 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


241 


are  they  not  brought  before  a  military  tribu 
nal,  and  put  through  the  forms  of  trial  and 
hanged  ?  If  they  are  traitors,  they  should  be. 
What  a  grand  spectacle  it  would  present ! 
How  proud  would  be  the  bearing  of  that  brave 
and  gallant  General  who  has,  by  his  paid  spies 
and  informers,  been  so  industriously  extending 
this  order,  duping  innocent  men  into  it,  ini 
tiating  rebel  officers,  carrying  messages  be 
tween  Dodd  &  Co.,  and  traitors  in  arms,  and 
facilitating  by  all  possible  means  the  grand 
carnival  of  blood  that  was  to  have  been  inaug 
urated  in  this  city  on  the  10th  of  last  August ! 
It  is  true,  the  accumulated  wail  of  widows 
and  orphans  would  have  risen,  even  to  the 
threshold  of  the  Courts  of  Heaven,  and  what 
of  all  that  ?  the  strength  of  the  Democratic 
party  would  be  very  much  broken,  and  the 
soul  of  John  Brown  would  go  "  marching  on." 

We  have  been  informed  that  the  commanders 
of  armies  frequently  resort  to  such  means. 
Possibly.  But  who  ever  heard  of  a  com 
mander  sending  out  agents  to  recruit  for  the 
ranks  of  an  enemy?  What  would  be  thought 
of  General  Grant  if  he  should  send  out 
agents  to  recruit  for  the  purpose  of  filling 
up  the  decimated  ranks  of  Lee's  army?  And 
yet  Carrington  paid  and  encouraged  Stidger 
to  extend,  as  rapidly  as  possible,  an  organiza 
tion  that  is"  claimed  to  be  treasonable.  And 
Zumro,  another  of  his  infamous  spies,  in 
veigled  innocent  and  unsuspecting  farmers 
into  it  for  the  purpose  of  betraying  them  into 
peril. 

But  I  must  refer,  again,  to  that  obnoxious 
obligation,  in  order  to  obtain  a  fair  and  ra 
tional  interpretation  of  its  phraseology,  and 
to  ascertain  if  it  is  not  consistent  with  patri 
otism  and  most  devoted  loyalty,  if  you  please. 
It  is  a  promise  to  take  up  arms,  if  needs  be, 
against  particular  forms  of  Government, 
"found  in  arms,  waging  war  against  a  people 
or  peoples  who  are  endeavoring  to  establish 
or  have  inaugurated  a  government  for  them 
selves,  of  their  own  free  choice,  and  in  ac 
cordance  with,  and  founded  upon,  the  eternal 
principles  of  truth."  Having  shown  that  no 
usurped  Government  exists  in  this  country, 
and  that  the  order  has  not  found  it  necessary 
to  take  up  arms  at  all;  let  us  endeavor  to  as 
certain  if  the  contingency  has  happened,  upon 
which  they  obligated  themselves  to  take  up 
arms  for  the  people  or  peoples  in  whose  behalf 
they  propose  to  volunteer.  And  we  inquire 
where  is  that  people  "who  have  established  or 
inaugurated  a  government  of  their  own  free 
choice,  and  in  accordance  with,  and  founded 
upon,  the  eternal  principles  of  truth?"  It  will 
not  do  to  say  that  the  Southern  Confederacy 
is  that  people,  for  it  would  be  a  eulogy  on 
Jeff  Davis'  Government  more  glowing  than 
any  Son  of  Liberty  ever  uttered.  Is  their 
cause  that  of  the  oppressed?  Is  our  Govern 
ment  a  usurpation?  Is  the  Southern  Confed 
eracy  founded  upon  the  eternal  principles  of 
truth?  All  this  must  be  admitted  in  order  to 
make  a  state  of  things  upon  which  they  agreed 
to  take  up  arms. 

Biit  it  is  claimed  that  this  obligation  has  a 
different  meaning,  known   to  and  understood 
by  the  order.     Allow  me  to  invite  your  atten- 
16  * 


tion  to  the  evidence  upon  that  point.  There 
are  but  three  witnesses  whos«  testimony  tends 
to  support  that  view :  Tranter,  Teney  and 
Robertson.  A  case  must  be  desperate  indeed 
which  relies  for  support  on  the  testimony  of 
such  witnesses — ignorant  and  stupid  beyond 
comparison.  I  am  at  a  loss  to  know  how  the 
latter  ever  found  his  way  from  the  woods  of 
Randolph  county  to  this  Capitol;  the  other 
two  were  drafted  and  duly  escorted  here,  and 
no  doubt  testified  under  the  hope  of  indul 
gence  from  the  draft  in  proportion  as  their 
testimony  might  prove  valuable.  Tranter  and 
Teney  contradict  each  other  in  almost  every 
particular,  except,  that  they  both  swear  that 
John  W.  Stone  told  them  that  the  Circle  of  the 
Mighty  Host,  and  also  the  Golden  Circle,  were 
to  "assist  Jeff  Davis  north  and  south."  Tran 
ter  swears  that  this  obligation  was  a  part  of 
the  Golden  Circle,  but  not  of  the  Mighty  Host, 
Teney,  who  was  not  a  member  of  the  Golden 
Circle,  says  that  he  was  of  the  Mighty  Host. 
But  neither  of  these  pillars  of  the  Government 
was  a  member  of  the  American  Knights  or 
Sons  of  Liberty.  The  evidence  further  shows 
that  both  the  defendant,  Horsey,  and  the  Gov 
ernment  witness,  Connell,  denied  and  repudi 
ated  the  declarations  of  John  W.  Stone,  who, 
for  aught  that  appears  in  the  evidence,  may 
have  been  a  Stidger  or  a  Zumro.  But  in  op 
position  to  this  apology  for  testimony,  we  have 
the  evidence  of  two  Government  witnesses, 
Messrs.  Bingham  and  Harrison,  and  in  addi 
tion  thereto  the  testimony  of  the  large  array 
of  witnesses  for  the  defendants — all  of  the 
most  honorable  character,  and  many  holding 
the  highest  social  and  official  positions — com 
ing  from  various  sections  of  the  State,  all 
bearing  witness  to  the  fact  that  the  objects 
of  the ,  order  were  purely  political,  and  in 
tended  solely  to  operate  upon  the  elections  by 
a  more  systematic  organization  of  the  Demo 
cratic  party  ;  just  as  the  Republican  party 
was  doing  through  the  instrumentality  of  the 
Loyal  League*  which  it  was  intended  to  coun 
teract;  and  none  of  them  understanding  the 
obligation  to  mean  any  thing  more  than  it 
said,  or  than  the  words  themselves  rationally 
implied.  The  testimony  of  Mr.  Bingham  is 
conclusive  upon  this  point;  he  early  became  a 
member,  attended  Grand  Councils,  acted  on 
committees,  and  was  in  almost  daily  inter 
course  with  Dodd  and  other  leading  members 
of  the  order,  and  yet  never  knew  of  any 
other  than  its  political  character  until  Dodd 
revealed  his  insane  and  hellish  proposition, 
when  he  immediately  took  measures  to  circum 
vent  it.  And,  I  submit,  that  the  conduct  of 
Mr.  Bingham  is  in  a  commendable  contrast  to 
that  of  the  authorities.  As  soon  as  he  was 
informed  of  Dodd's  proposed  plot,  his  best  ef 
forts  were  at  once  directed  to  paralyze  the  em 
bryo  rebellion;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
authorities  who  knew  it  all,  long  before  Mr. 
Bingham  did,  instead  of  destroying  it,  were 
nursing  and  encouraging  it,  that  it  might 
bring  forth  the  ripe  fruit  of  anarchy,  strife, 
and  bloodshed.  The  evidence  of  Stidger,  their 
detective  and  witness,  shows  that  while  under 
the  pay  and  direction  of  Carrington,  and  with 
his  consent  and  approbation,  he  (Stidger)  was 


242 


TREASON   TRIALS  AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


extending  the  order  as  rapidly  as  possible, 
both  in  Indiana  and  Kentucky;  that  with  the 
same  approbation  he  initiated  rebel  officers 
carried  messages  between  Dodd  and  others 
and  officers  in  the  Confederate  service,  and  af 
forded  every  facility  to  Dodd  and  his  immedi 
ate  confederates  to  arrange  and  perfect  the 
plan  for  the  inauguration  of  civil  war  in  In 
diana,  keeping  the  authorities  here  constantly 
advised  of  every  movement,  by  regular  and 
frequent  reports;  and  all  this  for  the  sole  pur 
pose  of  influencing  the  then  pending  elections ! 
History  affords  no  parallel  to  the  dark,  malig 
nant  designs  against  peace  and  good  order,  on 
the  part  of  those  intrusted  with  their  preser 
vation.  They  were  fully  advised  of  the  exist 
ence  of  what  they  claim  to  have  been  a  most 
infernal  conspiracy  against  the  peace  of  the 
State;  they  witnessed  the  maturing  of  the 
scheme;  they  watched  the  preparation  of  the 
brand  that  was  to  enkindle  civil  war,  and  yet 
raised  not  a  finger  to  stop  it.  Like  the  tiger, 
standing  at  the  edge  of  his  jungle,  watching 
the  unfortunate  traveler  as  he  comes  along, 
springs  upon  his  victim,  crushes  his  bones  and 
laps  up  his  blood;  so  they  looked  with  savage 
delight  upon  the  proposed  uprising,  regarding 
no  other  consequence  than  its  probable  influ 
ence  upon  the  elections.  It  seemed  to  matter 
little  to  them,  though  the  fire  of  civil  war 
should  desolate  our  homes,  and  cause  the 
"shuddering  mother  to  hug  her  babe  more 
olosely  to  her  bosom,"  so  that  they  could  only 
remain  masters  of  the  burnt  and  blackened 
field.  If  Mr.  Milligan  merits  penalties  for 
knowing  nothing  about  these  alleged  conspira 
cies,  what  meed  of  punishment  is  due  to  those 
authorities  ? 

According  to  the  theory  of  the  prosecution, 
Bingham  was  a  Son  of  Liberty,  and  therefore 
a  co-conspirator  with  Dodd;  and  yet  it  is  to 
Bingham,  and  not  to  the  authorities,  that  the 
people  of  Indiana  are  indebted  for  being  saved 
from  the  woes  and  horrors  of  civil  war.  He 
quenched  the  flame  that  the  authorities  were 
fanning.  While  they  were  nursing,  he  was 
stifling  it.  This  may  not  unjustly  have  given 
rise  to  the  dark  suggestion,  .  now  current 
throughout  the  State,  that  Dodd  was  the  mere 
hired  tool  of  Carrington  and  his  co-conspira 
tors  against  the  peace  of  the  State.  But  it  is 
asked  why  did.  not  Bingham  denounce  Dodd 
to  the  authorities?  My  answer  is,  they  knew 
all  about  it,  long  before  he  did;  and  in  turn, 
I  demand,  on  behalf  of  the  people  of  Indiana, 
whose  homes  were  in  jeopardy,  why  did  the 
authorities  suffer  Dodd  and  Walker  to  remain 
in  this  cit}r,  unarrested,  for  weeks  after  they 
were  apprised  of  the  whole  plot?  Surely  they 
could  not  have  considered  it  dangerous.  If  I 
am  asked  why  Mr.  Milligan  did  not  act  as  did 
Bingham;  my  answer  is,  that  he  had  no 
knowledge  of  the  scheme  until  it  was  exposed 
nnd  abandoned. 

But  I  return  again  to  the  consideration  of 
that,  obligation,  as  it  is  the  only  prop  upon 
which  the  prosecution  can  reasonably  rest  its 
claim  that  the  order  is  a  conspiracy  per  se; 
and  I  submit,  that  its  meaning  must  be  ascer 
tained  by  the  same  rules  by  which  other 
^writings  are  construed  by  the  courts — that  is, 


by  the  import  of  the  words  taken  in  their  or 
dinary  or  common  acceptation,  the  sense  in 
which  they  are  generally  used  and  received. 
For,  otherwise,  how  are  the  members  to  know 
the  meaning  of  the  obligation,  especially  in 
the  absence  of  such  lights  as  Captain  Burke- 
bile.  Wesley  Tranter  and  John  W.  Stone?  Let 
it  be  borne  in  mind  that  this  order  was  secret, 
and,  therefore,  there  could  be  no  motive  for 
making  the  obligation  mean  more  than,  or 
different  from  what  the  language  imported. 
I  submit,  therefore,  that  the  Commission  will 
not  feel  called  upon  to  adopt  a  rule  of  interpre 
tation  heretofore  unknown  to  judicial  investi 
gations,  in  order  to  make  offensive  that  which 
is  otherwise  harmless;  and  especially  against 
such  an  array  of  testimony  to  the  contrary. 

If  the  order  of  American  Knights,  or  Sons 
of  Liberty,  is  a  conspiracy  per  se,  it  is  only  a 
conspiracy  to  do  what  the  rational  import  of 
the  obligations,  the  ritual,  and  the  declara 
tion  of  principles  imposed  upon  its  members 
at  the  time  they  became  such;  and  therefore, 
no  after  agreement  of  certain  of  its  members, 
no  matter  how  high  in  rank,  to  do  a  particular 
thing,  not  within  the  purview  of  the  order, 
can  be  charged  to  the  order,  nor  to  any  of  its 
members  not  actually  a  party  to  such  subse 
quent  agreement.  This  I  submit  as  a  legal 
proposition,  and  challenge  contradiction.  To 
make  the  act  or  declaration  of  a  conspirator 
binding  upon  another,  it  must  be  made  or 
done  in  pursuance  of  the  originally  concerted 
plan,  and  with  reference  to  the  common  ob 
ject.  1  Green  1.  Ev.,  \  111,  et  seq.;  2  Stark.  Ev., 
233,  et  seq. 

Let  us  apply  this  principle.  And  here  I  will 
assume,  with  all  confidence,  that  it  will  not  be 
held  that  any  of  the  obligations  of  the  order 
proposed  that  Camps  Morton,  Douglas,  etc., 
were  to  be  emptied  of  their  prisoners.  If  that 
was  agreed  to,  who  were  the  parties  to  the 
agreement?  From  the  evidence,  if  it  was 
agreed  to  at  all,  it  was  simply  an  open  propo 
sition  of  Dodd's;  or,  if  you  choose  to  give  it 
the  latitude  claimed  by  that  "mud-sill"  of  in 
famy,  who,  after  being  on  joint  trial  for  three 
weeks,  turned  informer,  in  order  to  purchase 
liis  own  release,  illustrating  the  truth  of  the 
adage  that  "it  is  always  the  biggest  scoundrel 
that  turns  State's  evidence;" — of  that  crea 
ture — but  I  will  not  speak  of  him;  contempt 
las  the  property  of  descending  very  low,  but 
to  even  that  there  is  a  limit,  and  it  therefore 
stops  far  short  of  Horace  Heffren.  I  repeat,  if 
we  adopt  his  statement,  that  the  parties  to  the 
conspiracy  to  seize  the  arsenals  and  liberate 
he  prisoners,  consisted  of  delegates  from  all 
the  States  but  two,  and  that  all  the  delegates 
were  Sons  of  Liberty;  yet,  unless  that  con 
spiracy  comes  fairly  within  the  purview  of  the 
order,  it  implicates  no  one  but  the  parties  ac 
tually  agreeing  to  the  unlawful  undertaking. 
Dodd,  Heffren,  Wilson,  and  others,  may  have 
conspired,  but  it  was  only  their  own  con 
spiracy,  and  Mr.  Milligan  and  other  of  the  de- 
'endants  are  not  shown  to  have  taken  any 
aart  in  it,  or  to  have  had  any  knowledge  of  it, 
and,  therefore,  are  not  conspirators  with  Dodd. 
lence,  their  declarations  and  admissions  are 
not  legitimate  evidence  against  this  defendant. 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


243 


For  example:  Suppose  that  A  conspires  with 
B  to  rob  the  mail,  and  that,  during  the  exist 
ence  of  that  conspirac}7,  B  conspires  with  0  to 
kill  Governor  Morton;  now,  upon  the  trial  of 
A  for  the  former  conspiracy,  the  declarations 
of  B  and  C  would  not  be  competent,  although 
they  are  parties  with  A  to  another  conspiracy. 
Thus  certain  persons  became  members  of  the 
Sons  of  Liberty;  a  part  of  them  afterward, 
without  the  knowledge  or  consent  of  the 
others,  conspired  to  seize  arsenals  and  release 
rebel  prisoners,  etc.  Can  those  other  members, 
by  any  principle  of  law,  be  bound  by  the 
declaration  of  those  conspirators,  or  be  held 
to  answer  for  their  acts?  Why,  the  evidence 
shows  that  Dodd  not  only  contemplated  duping 
and  inveigling  the  Sons  of  Liberty  into  his 
scheme,  but  also  the  whole  Democratic  party. 
You  might,  therefore,  with  as  much  propriety, 
hold  the  individual  members  of  that  party  re 
sponsible,  as  the  individual  members  of  the 
Sons  of  Liberty,  who,  like  Mr.  Milligan,  (I 
speak  by  the  evidence,)  had  no  knowledge  of 
it  whatever.  Says  Mr.  Justice  Buller,  in 
Hardy's  case:  "Before  the  evidence  of  the 
conspiracy  can  aifcct  the  prisoner  materially, 
it  is  necessary  to  make  out  another  point,  to- 
wit,  that  he  consented  to  the  extent  that  the  others 
did."  2  Stark.  Ev.,  234.  And  in  the  course  of 
the  same  trial,  Mr.  Roscoe  says,  "It  was  said 
by  Eyre,  C.  J.,  that  in  a  case  of  conspiracy, 
general  evidence  of  the  thing  conspired  is 
received,  and  then  the  party  before  the  Court 
is  to  be  affected  for  his  share  of  it"  Ros.  Orim. 
Ev.,  414. 

"The  rule,"  says  Mr.  Starkie,  "that  one 
man  is  not  to  be  affected  by  the  acts  and 
declarations  of  a  stranger,  rests  upon  the 
principles  of  purest  justice;  and  although  the 
courts,  in  cases  of  conspiracy,  have,  out  of 
convenience,  and  on  account  of  the  difficulty 
in  otherwise  proving  the  guilt  of  the  parties, 
admitted  the  acts  and  declarations  of  strangers 
to  be  given  in  evidence,  in  order  to  establish 
the  fact  of  a  conspiracy,  it  is  to  be  remembered 
that  this  is  an  inversion  of  the  usual  order  for 
the  sake  of  convenience,  and  that  such  evi 
dence  is  in  the  result  material  so  far  only  as 
the  assent  of  the  accused  to  what  had  been 
done  by  others  was  proved."  2  Stark.  Ev.,  235. 

If  insurrection  was  one  of  the  purposes  of 
the  order,  why  was  not  that  subject  intro 
duced,  discussed  or  suggested  in  some  of  its 
business  meetings,  when  none  but  those  in  its 
secrets  were  supposed  to  be  present?  And 
yet  neither  Government  detectives  nor  truck 
ling  accomplices  ever  heard  of  it.  But  it  is 
said  that  there  was  an  inner  circle  of  the  or 
der,  namely,  the  military  part  of  it,  and  that 
that  was  treasonable.  Harrison  states  that  the 
order  was  fully  organized  at  Terre  Haute,  and 
a  Grand  Council  appointed.  In  this  organiza 
tion  there  was  no  military  feature,  and  it  was 
not  till  long  afterward  that  what  was  termed 
the  "military  bill,"  or  military  feature  of  the 
Order,  was  introduced;  and  yet,  while  all  the 
other  proceedings  of  the  order,  including  re 
ports  from  county  temples,  were  printed  and 
circulated,  this  "military  bill"  was  not.  In 
fact,  it  remained  a  dead  letter*,  and  was  not 
even  known  to  members  of  the  Grand  Council, 


as  we  are  informed  by  witnesses  of  the  most 
honorable  character,  such  as  Judge  Lough- 
ridge,  and  Messrs.  Bird,  Ibach  and  Winters, 
a!l  members  of  the  Grand  Council,  and  who 
were  never  advised  of  any  other  than  the  po 
litical  character  of  the  order.  The  military 
feature,  therefore,  never  formed  any  part  of 
the  order;  and  if  it  existed  at  all,  was  only  a 
part  of  an  independent  conspiracy  of  Dodd 
and  others. 

I  come  now  to  the  consideration  of  another 
inquiry,  to  which  I  respectfully  ask  your  at 
tention.  Is  there  any  legal  evidence  of  a  con 
spiracy,  even  on  the  part  of  Dodd  and  others? 
Do  all  the  acts  and  declarations  proven,  make 
out  a  conspiracy  within  the  meaning  of  the 
law?  although  I  insist  that  Mr.  Milligan  is 
not  concerned  in  this  inquiry.  "A  conspiracy 
is  a  corrupt  agreement  to  do,  by  concerted  ac 
tion,  something  unlawful."  [Bishop,  supra.~\ 
Let  us,  then,  see  what,  if  any  thing,  was 
agreed  upon ;  for  if  what  is  charged  was  ac 
tually  agreed  upon,  I  will  admit  that  it  is 
both  corrupt  and  unlawful. 

It  is  claimed  that  the  meeting  at  Chicago,  of 
July  20,  1864,  conspired  to  seize  certain  ar 
senals,  release  rebel  prisoners,  and  revolu 
tionize  the  Government.  But  what  evidence 
has  been  given  in  support  of  that  propo 
sition? 

Heffren  swears  that  Wilson  told  him  that 
this  uprising  was  agreed  upon  at  Chicago. 
But  Wilson,  who  was  there,  swears  that  no 
business  (to  his  knowledge)  was  done  at  that 
meeting;  that  Barrett,  who  had  called  it,  said 
it  was  to  be  a  meeting  of  military  men,  but 
that  they  had  not  come.  Wilson  tells  us  that 
several  plans  were  talked  of;  that  Dodd's  plan 
seemed  to  meet  with  most  favor,  but  was  not 
agreed  upon.  This  is  certainly  better  evi 
dence  than  the  hearsay  of  Heffren;  besides,  it 
is  corroborated  by  the  testimonj7  of  Harrison 
and  Bingham,  and  also  by  the  very  character 
of  Dodd's  plan.  What  did  Dodd  tell  Harrison? 
He  says:  "If  it  was  agreed  upon,  he  (Dodd) 
was  to  have  charge  of  releasing  the  rebel  pris 
oners  at  this  point."  Again,  Harrison  informs 
us  that  Dodd  told  him  that  it  was  not  finally 
agreed  upon,  but  depended  upon  a  consulta 
tion  of  prominent  individuals,  whom  he  was  to 
summon  together  for  the  purpose  of  deter 
mining  as  to  his  plan.  And  hece  flows  in  an 
item  of  evidence  which  can  not  be  explained 
on  any  other  principle  than  this  uprising  had 
not  been  agreed  upon.  It  is  this:  Dr.  Bowles 
(as  the  evidence  clearly  shows)  was  at  the 
Chicago  meeting.  Now,  had  the  uprising  been 
agreed  upon  there,  Dr.  Bowles  would  have  un 
derstood  the  whole  affair.  Why,  then,  would 
Dodd  send  his  son  to  Bowles  (as  Harrison 
says)  to  consult  upon  the  proposition?  The 
evidence  also  shows  that  it  was  for  the  pur 
pose  of  consultation  that  Milligan,  Hum 
phreys,  Yeakle,  Taylor  and  others  were  sum 
moned  by  Dodd.  Nor  was  this  call  confined 
to  the  so-called  Major-Generals,  but  embraced 
others,  to-wit:  Yeakle  and  Taylor.  They  were 
not  ordered  to  report  to  Dodd  for  duty,  but 
were  to  consider  the  propriety  of  an  uprising, 
and  to  decide  whether  or  not  it  should  take 
place. 


244 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


All  of  Dodd's  declarations  show  that  the 
uprising  was  not  determined  upon  by  the  very 
parties  whose  consent  and  co-operation  were 
necessary  to  its  inauguration.  You  will  r<* 
member  the  fact  that  the  meeting  in  Chicago 
was  on  the  20th  of  July,  when  Dodd  was  in 
company  with  Judge  Bullitt ;  that  immediately 
upon  his  return  home,  he  communicated  the 
matter  to  Harrison,  who  fixes  the  date  of  that 
return  at  the  29th  of  the  same  month;  and 
•also  that  the  proposed  uprising  was  to  take 
place  on  the  16th  of  August.  Now,  if  the 
scheme  had  been  agreed  upon  at  Chicago,  to 
take  place  within  so  short  a  period,  is  it  ra 
tional  to  suppose  that  Dodd,  who  is  represented 
to  be  an  impetuous,  hasty  man,  would  have 
slept  until  more  than  one-third  of  the  time 
had  elapsed  before  he  made  any  move  toward 
that  preparation  which  would  necessarily  re 
quire  so  much  time  in  maturing?  The  idea 
is  preposterous;  the  impetuosity  of  Dodd 
would  have  put  the  thing  in  motion  at  once. 
But  we  have  the  sworn  statement  of  three  of 
the  Government  witnesses,  that  the  uprising 
had  not  been  agreed  upon,  but  was  awaiting 
the  sanction  and  co-operation  of  others,  whose 
concurrence  was  necessary. 

Not  only  do  Wilson  and  Harrison  state  that 
the  project  was  not  agreed  to,  but  Bingham 
(to  whom  Dodd  divulged  his  whole  plan,  and 
who,  according  to  Dodd's  statement,  was  the 
only  person  to  whom  it  had  been  revealed) 
informs  us  that  Dodd's  scheme  required  his 
consent  as  a  condition  precedent.  That  he 
(Bingham)  as  chairman  of  the  Democratic 
State  Central  Committee,  must  agree  to  it, 
and  co-operate  with  him,  by  calling  a  mass 
convention  of  the  Democracy  of  the  State  as 
a  part  of  the  programme,  without  \vhich  co-op 
eration  on  the  part  of  Bingham,  the  whole 
scheme  would  have  to  be  abandoned;  as  it 
could  not  otherwise  receive  its  initiatory  im 
pulse.  Now  this  whole  thing  is  consistent 
with  itself,  for  the  Commission  will  bear  in 
mind  Mr.  Harrison's  testimony,  that  when 
Dodd  sent  him  to  notify  Mr.  Milligan  to  at 
tend  this  council  of  the  leading  men  of  the 
order,  he  instructed  him  not  to  inform  Milli 
gan  of  the  nature  of  his  errand,  but  merely 
to  state  that  business  of  a  very  important  char 
acter  would  be  considered. 

I  ask  here  (though  for*  the  time  digressing) 
if  this  looks  as  though  Mr.  Milligan  knew  of 
the  scheme,  especially  when  it  is  further  re 
membered  that  he  did  not  attend  the  proposed 
council?  I  respectfully  ask  the  learned  Judge 
Advocate  to  answer  this  if  he  can.  If  Mr. 
Milligan  was  a  co-conspirator  with  Dodd,  why 
must  he  be  kept  in  ignorance  of  the  project? 
Why  instruct  the  messenger  to  observe  silence 
as  to  the  proposed  revolution?  Does  it  not 
show  that  Dodd  considered  Mr.  Milligan  as 
only  belonging  to  the  political,  or  rather,  the 
silly  and  harmless  branch  of  the  order?  al 
though  he  had  appointed  him  a  Major  Gen 
eral,  and  hoped  to  inveigle  him  into  his  plots! 
I  earnestly  submit  to  you,  as  rational  and  im 
partial  judges,  that  this  one  circumstance  is 
a  complete  refutation  of  the  whole  charge  that 
Mr.  Milligan  was  a  party  to  Dodd's  proposed 
conspiracy. 


But,  to  return :  what,  I  inquire,  was  the  pur 
pose  of  calling  these  men  together,  if  the  plan 
had  already  been  agreed  upon?  Why,  especially, 
keep  Mr.  Millignn  in  ignorance  of  the  matter? 
Why  instruct  the  messenger  to  keep  him  in 
the  dark?  Did  Dodd  mistrust  his  messenger? 
Was  he  unwilling  to  intrust  so  important  a 
secret  to  him?  The  evidence  informs  us,  that 
j  he  had  already  imparted  the  whole  matter  to 
him;  he  must,  therefore,  have  regarded  his  mes 
senger  as  trusty.  Then  it  will  be  remembered 
that  the  prosecution  insists,  that,  according  to 
the  constitution  of  this  order,  the  members 
were  to  implicitly  obey  the  commands  of  the 
Grand  Commander;  I  ask,  then,  if  this  scheme 
had  been  agreed  upon,  where  was  the  necessity 
of  calling  these  men  together?  He  could  have 
assigned  to  each  his  duty,  and  implicit  obedi 
ence  must  be  the  result. 

But,  possibly,  the  prosecution  will  abandon 
its  theory  as  to  the  supreme  power  of  the 
Grand  Commander.  Because,  if  insurrection 
had  been  one  of  the  purposes  of  the  order, 
why  try  to  keep  Mr.  Milligan  ignorant  of  a 
fact  which,  of  necessity,  he  must  have  known? 
and  why  impose  secrecy  upon  the  messenger, 
Mr.  Harrison?  This,  I  think,  not  only  shows 
how  the  members  of  the  order,  but  also  how 
the  Grand  Commander  understood  that  part 
of  the  obligation  which  pledged  them  to  obe 
dience.  Thus,  when  we  come  to  look  at  the 
case  as  judges  and  lawyers,  and  not  as  mere 
partisans,  we  find  that  there  has  been  proven 
no  such  complete  agreement,  as  is  necessary 
under  the  law  of  conspiracy,  even  on  the  part 
of  Dodd,  much  less  on  the  part  of  Mr.  Milli 
gan,  who  knew  nothing  of  it  until  it  had  died 
from  want  of  sympathy  on  the  part  of  those 
whose  approval  was,  to  give  it  vital  force. 

Were  it  necessary,  I  might,  without  impro 
priety,  refer  to  the  cloud  of  suspicion  through 
which  the  testimony  of  Stidger,  Zumro,  Heff- 
ren  and  Wilson  came  to  us.  The  two  former 
stand  in  the  execrable  light  of  informers; 
the  latter,  in  the  equally  odious  light  of  ac 
complices,  purchasing  their  own  immunity  at 
the  expense  of  their  former  alleged  confeder 
ates;  the  former  have  ever  been  regarded  with 
scorn  and  abhorrence,  while  the  latter  have  al 
ways,  by  all  honorable  minds,  been  character 
ized  as  infamous.  Let  Heffren  pass — "room 
for  the  leper,  room!''  Of  Wilson,  I  scarcely 
know  how  to  speak — he  is  self-accused  and 
self-condemned.  Contrast  him,  if  you  please, 
with  the  honorable  bearing  of  my  client,  and 
it  ought  to  make  the  "blush  of  shame"  crim 
son  even  the  cheek  of  Wilson.  He  came  to  the 
witness  stand  with  traitors'  money  under  his 
control,  and  loaned  out  to  his  friends — ho 
came  and  confessed  to  the  treason,  as  well  «s 
to  the  ineffable  meanness  of  accepting,  from 
the  hands  of  his  counti-y's  enemies,  the  piti 
ful  sum  of  his  expenses  to  and  from  Chicago. 
And  yet,  this  double-dyed  trajtor — traitor  to 
his  own  country,  according  to  his  own  show 
ing,  and,  for  the  sake  of  purchasing  his  own 
release,  traitor  to  his  former  alleged  confed 
erates — is  to  go  forth  to  the  world,  duly  in 
dorsed  by  the  Government  as  honest  and  cred 
ible;  for,  I  understand,  it  asks  you  to  believe 
him.  Oh!  kind  and  parental  Administration, 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT  INDIANAPOLIS 


245 


that  allows  the  confessed  traitor  to  go  un 
punished,  that  it  may  wreak  its  vengeance 
upon  a  mere  political  opponent! 

No  Court,  either  in  ancient  or  modern  times, 
has  allowed  the  conviction  of  an  individual 
upon  the  uncorroborated  testimony  of  accom 
plices.  Mr.  Greenleaf,  in  speaking  of  this 
kind  of  evidence,  says:  "The  case  of  accom 
plices  is  usually  mentioned  under  the  head  of 
infamy."  Greenl.  Ev.,  $  379. 

Mr.  Starkiesays:  "With  respect  to  the  force 
and  effect  of  such  testimony,  it  must,  from  its 
very  nature,  be  regarded  with  jealousy  and 
suspicion."  "It  is  hard,"  Lord  Hale  observes, 
"to  take  away  the  life  of  any  person  upon  the 
evidence  of  a  parliccps  criiuinis,  unless  there  be 
very  considerable  circumstances  which  may 
give  the  greater  credit  to  what  he  swears. 

"In  strictness  of  law,  indeed,  a  prisoner 
may  be  convicted  on  the  testimony  of  a  single 
accomplice,  since,  where  competent  evidence 
is  adduced,  it  is  for  the  jury  to  determine  the 
effect  of  that  evidence.  But  in  practice  it  is 
usual  to  directthe  jury  to  acquit  the  prisoner, 
when  the  evidence  of  an  accomplice  stands 
uncorroborated  in  material  circumstances, 
but  this,  it  is  said,  is  a  matter  resting  entirely 
within  the  discretion  of  the  Courts."  2  Stark. 
Ev.,  p.  12. 

"But,"  says  Mr.  Phillips,  "though  accom 
plices  are  received  as  witnesses,  their  testi 
mony  ought  to  be  received  by  a  jury  with  a 
sober  degree  of  jealousy  and  caution,  for  on 
their  own  confession  they  stand  contamin 
ated  with  guilt,  and  in  the  hope  of  lessening 
their  own  infamy,  will  often  be  tempted  to 
throw  as  much  guilt  as  possible  upon  the  pris 
oner.  They  may  also,  in  some  cases,  be  en 
titled  to  rewards  on  the  prisoner's  conviction, 
and  in  all  cases  expected  to  earn  a  pardon, 
arid  as  fear  is  usually  their  motive,  the  same 
feeling  may  tempt  them  to  exaggerate  their 
evidence  for  the  purpose  of  destroying  their 
former  associate  and  securing  themselves 
against  his  vengeance.''  1  Phillips'  Ev.,  29. 

"But  their  testimony  alone  is  seldom  of  suf 
ficient  weight  with  a  jury  to  convict  the  of 
fenders,  the  temptation  to  commit  perjury 
being  so  great,  where  the  witness,  by  accusing 
another,  may  escape  himself.  The  practice, 
therefore,  is  to  advise  the  jury  to  regard  the 
evidence  of  au  accomplice  only  so  far  as  he  is 
confirmed,  in  some  part  of  his  testimony,  by 
unimpeachable  testimony."  /&.,  p.  82. 

"The  degree  of  credit,"  Mr.  Greenleaf  says, 
"which  ought  to  be  given  to  an  accomplice,  is 
a  matter  exclusively  within  the  province  of 
the  jury.  It  has  sometimes  been  said  that 
they  ought,  not,  to  believe  him  unless  his  testi 
mony  is  corroborated  by  other  evidence;  and, 
without  doubt,  gre.it  caution  in  weighing  such 
testimony,  is  dictated  by  prudence  and  good 
reason.  But  there  is  no  such  rule  of  law,  it 
being  expressly  conceded  that  the  jury  may, 
if  they  please,  act  on  the  evidence  of  the  ac 
complice  without  any  confirmation  of  his 
statement.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  judges,  in 
their  discretion,  will  advise  a  jury  not  to  con 
vict  of  felony  upon  the  testimony  of  an  ac 
complice  alone,  and  without  corroboration, 
and  it  is  now  so  generally  the  practice  to  give 


j  them  such  advice,  that  its  omission  would  be 
I  regarded  as  an  omission  of  duty  on  the  part  of 
I  the  judge.  And,  considering  the  respect  always 
|  paid  by  the  jury  to  this  advice  from  the  bench, 
it  may  be  regarded  as  the  settled  course  of 
practice  not  to  convict  a  prisoner,  in  any  case 
of  felony,  upon  the  sole  and  uncorroborated 
testimony  of  an  accomplice."  1  Greenl.  Ev., 
§  380. 

"Judges,"  observed  Lord  Ellenborough, 
"will  advise  a  jury  not  to  believe  an  accom 
plice,  unless  he  is  confirmed,  or  only  in  so  far 
as  he  is  confirmed,  but  if  he  is  believed,  his 
testimony  is  unquestionably  to  establish  the 
facts  he  deposes.  Jones'  case,  2  Camp.,  132. 
So,  where,  on  an  indictment  for  highway  rob 
bery,  an  accomplice  only  was  called,  the  Court, 
though  it  admitted  such  evidence  was  legal, 
thought  it  too  dangerous  to  permit  a  convic 
tion  to  take  place,  and  the  prisoners  were  ac 
quitted.  Jones  $  Davis  case,  1  Leach,  479. 
The  practice,  therefore,  is  for  the  Court  to  di 
rect  the  jury  in  such  cases  to  acquit  the  pris 
oner,  unless,  in  some  respects,  the  evidence  is 
confirmed.  Roscoe's  Orim.Ev.,p.  156. 

"  It  is  usual  for  a  Court  to  advise  a  jury  not 
to  regard  the  evidence  of  an  accomplice,  un 
less  he  is  confirmed  in  some  part  of  his  testi 
mony  by  unimpeachable  testimony.  If  con 
firmed  in  some  parts,  he  may  be  believed  in 
others."  U.  S.  vs.  Kipler,  1  Bald.  C.  C.  R.,  22 

I  might  stop  here  and  rest  the  defense  with 
propriety,  but  some  might  regard  my  duty  in 
complete,  and  ask  if  Mr.  Milligan's  alleged 
position  as  a  Major  General  in  the  order  had 
been  satisfactorily  disposed  of?  That  is  au 
easy  task.  For  the  sake  of  argument,  we  will 
admit  that  he  was  appointed  a  Major  General; 
but  where  is  the  evidence  that  he  ever  accepted 
that  appointment,  or  that  he  other  than  treated 
it  with  merited  contempt?  I  answer,  there  is 
none  whatever.  But  perhaps  it  is  proposed  to 
invert  the  usual  order  of  criminal  jurispru 
dence,  and  hold  him  guilty  unless  he  proves 
himself  innocent.  Even  in  that  case  we  are 
not  without  the  necessary  proof;  indeed,  we 
are  prepared  for  almost  any  rule.  Mr.  Ibach 
informs  us  that  at  the  Grand  Council,  in  June, 
1864,  it  was  stated  that  the  gentlemen  who 
had  been  appointed  Major  Generals,  had  not 
accepted,  and  that  it  was  agreed  in  Grand 
Council,  that,  if  they  did  not  accept  by  the 
ensuing  4th  of  July,  others  should  be  ap 
pointed  in  their  stead.  Indeed  there  is  no 
credible  testimony,  but  only  an  inference, 
that  he  ever  knew  of  his  appointment.  Mr. 
Harrison  states  that  the  first  appointment  was 
in  September,  1863,  and  it  is  not  pretended 
that  Mr.  Milligan  was  at  that  meeting ;  nor 
was  he  ever  informed  of  it  in  any  official  man 
ner,  as  the  Grand  Secretary,  Mr.  Harrison, 
nforms  us.  The  same  witness  also  states  that 
Mr.  Milligan  was  again  elected  a  Major  General 
at  the  February  Grand  Council;  but  this  was 
also  during  his  absence.  True,  Heffren  states 
that  Milligan  was  at  that  Grand  Council,  but 
his  is  only  another  indication  of  the  utter 
unworthiness  of  his  testimony,  for  we  have 
the  evidence  of  Messrs.  Bingham,  Daily,  Mo 
ses  Milligan,  Loughridge  and  Winters,  all 
corroborating  Harrison  and  impeaching  Heff- 


246 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


ren.  Can  they  all  be  mistaken  ?  Mr.  Daily, 
who  is  a  practicing  attorney  at  Huntington, 
informs  us  that  the  Court  at  that  place  was 
then  in  session,  and  that  Mr.  Milligan  was 
there.  Moses  Milligan,  who  was  a  court  bail 
iff,  gives  us  like  testimony.  Bingham  swears 
that  Mr.  Milligan  was  not  there.  Judge 
Loughridge,  a  delegate  to  the  Council,  in 
quired  for  him,  and  found  he  was  not  present, 
and  finally,  Mr.  Winters,  a  gentleman  from 
Mr.  Milligan's  town,  tells  us  that  they  both 
bought  railroad  tickets  for  Indianapolis,  but, 
owing  to  the  crowded  state  of  the  cars  when 
they  arrived  at  Iluntington,  Mr.  Milligan  re 
fused  to  go,  and  did  not  go.  That  he  (wit 
ness)  went,  and  that  inquiry  was  made  of  him 
for  the  reason  of  Milligan's  absence.  Stldger 
states  that  the  roll  of  Major  Generals  was 
called  at  the  June  Council;  but,  Mr.  Ibach, 
the  delegate  from  Huntington,  who  went  there 
with  Milligan,  contradicts  this,  and  makes 
the  reasonable  statement  that  if  any  one  from 
his  own  town  had  been  named  a  Major  Gen 
eral,  he  would  have  observed  it.  But  for  the 
sake  of  argument,  let  us  suppose  that  he  ac 
cepted  the  sounding  title  of  Major  General, 
yet  what  was  it  more  than  a  mere  intended 
compliment,  or  titular  dignification  ?  Thus 
the  titles,  "Grand  Commander,"  "Sergeant 
of  the  Guard/'  etc.,  etc.,  are  terms  of  high 
import  in  a  lodge  of  "Sons  of  Malta,"  and 
yet  the  recipients  of  these  "  blushing  honors  " 
were  never,  for  that  cause,  considered  trait 
ors,  although  tht,  crder  was  "military  in  its 
character."  The  title  of  "  King  "  is  one  of 
high  signification,  and  ordinarily  means 
much;  and  the  office  of  "King"  is  contrary 
to  the  Constitution  and  laws  of  the  United 
States  ;  and  yet,  who  ever  thought  of  holding 
an  individual  guilty  of  a  crime  because  of  his 
accepting  and  exercising  the  office  of  King  in 
a  Chapter  of  Royal  Arch  Masons  !  It  is  going- 
back  to  thosjB  days  of  constructive  treason, 
when  a  man  was  hanged  for  dreaming  that  he 
had  made  his  son  heir  to  the  crown,  although 
that  was  the  name  of  his  Inn;  and  another,whose 
favorite  buck  had  been  killed  by  the  King,  for 
wishing  that  the  deer,  horns  and  all,  were  in 
the  King  s  belly.  4  Black.  Com.,  p,  80.  Names 
do  not  always  signify  the  same  thing — a  Ma 
jor  General  in  the  army  is  a  position  \vell  un 
derstood,  and  having  well  defined  duties ; 
but  tell  me,  if  you  please,  what  were  the 
duties  of  a  Major  Genei-al  in  the  Sons  of  Lib 
erty  ?  Where  is  the  evidence  of  any  assigned 
duties  ?  Mere  high-sounding  names  are  not 
evidence.  Men's  lives  are  not  to  be  forfeited 
by  the  inconsiderate  use  of  such  flimsy  stuff. 

It  is  next  insisted  that  Mr.  Milligan  made  a 
speech  at  a  Democratic  mass  meeting  at  Fort 
Wayne,  on  the  13th  of  August  last;  in  which 
it  is  claimed  that  he   uttered   disloyal  senti 
ments,  urged   resistance  to  the  draft,  and  at 
tempted  to  incite  insurrection.     When  we  ask 
for  the  proof  of  all  this,  we  are  referred  to  the 
testimony  of  an  itinerant  news   gatherer  of! 
the  Cincinnati   Gazette  (and  which,  he  says,  is 
not  a  partisan  paper),  who  was  there  hunting, 
at  "a  penny  a  line,"  for  some  item  to  be  used  : 
against  the  Democratic  party,  in  that  political , 
contest.     True,  he  would  have  you  believe  that 


(the  speech  was  very  disloyal;  but  against  this, 
j  we  have  the  testimony  of  honorable  witnesses, 
|  Messrs.  Bird  and  Winters,  who  heard  the 
i  speech  throughout  (Mr.  Winters  having  re- 
,  ported  it  for  his  paper),  who  swear  there  was 
1  nothing  said  in  itcalculated  to  incite  resistance 
to  the  draft,  or  which  counseled  insurrection  ; 
that  the  speech  was  a  dry,  able,  and  argumen 
tative  one,  characterized  by  moderation  and 
respectful  language  toward  his  opponents ; 
that  he  dealt  in  no  denunciation  of  the  Gov 
ernment,  as  Mr.  Bush  would  have  you  believe, 
but  made  a  broad  distinction  between  the 
Government  and  the  Administration.  NJO  in 
surrection  followed  that  speech.  True,  he 
argued  in  favor  of  the  doctrine  of  State  Sov 
ereignty.  And  suppose  he  did.  It  is  no  new 
doctrine,  but  is  as  old  as  the  Constitution. 
The  great  and  good  men  of  America  have  ad 
vocated  the  same  ideas,  and  yet  were  uncon 
scious  of  committing  any  crime  in  doing  so. 
On  that  very  basis  our  Government  was  ad 
ministered  for  sixty  years  with  most  unpar 
alleled  success.  But  suppose  the  party  in 
power  docs  deem  it  a  political  heresy;  is 
heresy  of  political  opinion  a  crime  in  this 
country  ?  Who  is  to  be  the  judge  of  the  ques 
tion  of  what  is  heresy  of  opinion  ?  Shall  it 
be  the  party  in  power  ?  Then  it  would  be 
very  easy  for  them  to  perpetuate  that  power, 
by  condemning  all  their  political  opponents 
to  the  halter,  as  traitors.  Liberty  of  speech 
would  then  consist  in  the  right  to  say,  freely, 
what  the  Administration  dictated.  It  was  a 
wise  nemark  of  Jefferson,  that  "Error  of  opin 
ion  may  well  be  tolerated  as  long  as  reason  is 
left  free  to  combat  it." 

But  it  ought  not  to  be  expected  that  gentle 
men  of  the  age,  firmness,  honesty  and  intelli 
gence  of  Mr.  Milligan,  can  change  their 
honest  convictions  upon  political  questions  to 
suit  the  views  of  the  Administration,  brought 
into  power,  perhaps,  by  a  mere  changeling 
mob.  But  are  we  to  be  held  criminally  re 
sponsible  for  a  political  speech,  addressed  to 
a  political  meeting  in  the  course  of  a  political 
campaign,  even  though  it  be  bitter  and  de 
nunciatory  in  its  terms?  Were  it  so,  half  the 
political  speakers  in  the  United  States  would 
then  deserve  hanging.  I  have  only  contempt 
to  express  for  such  a  proposition.  Once  ad 
mit  that  principle,  and  probably  at  the  next 
change  of  administration  the  gentlemen  be 
fore  me  would  have  to  change  places  with  Mr. 
Milligan.  If  American  citizens  can  not,  in  a 
cool,  calm  and  respectful  manner,  criticise  the 
acts  of  their  public  servants,  in  a  canvass  for 
their  re-election,  it  is  time  they  should  be  in 
formed  of  the  new  order  of  things. 

The  next  thing  that  claims  our  considera 
tion  is  a  letter  from  Mr.  Milligan  to  General 
Dodd.  It  is  claimed  that  addressing  Dodd  as 
General,  is  an  acknowledgment  of  acquaint 
ance  with  his  military  character,  and  of  fa 
miliarity  Avith  what  is  termed  the  military 
branch  of  the  order.  But  has  it  any  such 
significance?  Titles  are  cheap  things  now-a- 
days.  In  this  country  they  do  not  preclude 
even  the  party  using  them  from  showing  that 
they  are  improperly  used.  Thus,  the  titles, 
'Squire  and  Judge,  are  not  unfrequently  ap- 


TREASON    TRIALS   AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


247 


plied  to  loafers;  and  how  often,  indeed,  do  we 
hear  individuals  called  Colonel,  upon  whose 
shoulders  the  ''Eagle  Bird"  has  never  rested; 
while  the  prefix  of  "Hon."  has  now  little  or  no 
meaning  beyond  compliment. 

In  this  letter,  Mr.  Milligan  is  writing  as  a 
politician,  his  name  having  been  presented  as 
a  candidate  for  Governor;  he  was  not  writing 
as  a  Son  of  Liberty.  That  the  appellation, 
General,  was  only  used  in  compliment,  is  cor 
roborated  by  the  fact  that  Dodd  was  not  Gen 
eral  in,  but  Grand  Commander  of,  the  Sons  of 
Liberty.  If  Mr.  Milligan  had  been  referring 
to  Dodd's  official  position  in  the  order,  he 
would  have  addressed  him  as  "Most  Eminent 
Grand  Commander."  I  ask  the  indulgence  of 
the  Commission  while  I  examine  this  letter  a 
little  further.  It  has  been  introduced  in  evi 
dence,  and  we  can  not  anticipate  the  uses  to 
which  the  learned  Judge  Advocate  will  at 
tempt  to  apply  it.  The  letter  is  a  confidential 
answer  to  another,  in  which  the  writer  states 
his  grief  on  account  of  the  desertion  of  sup 
posed  friends,  and  the  consequent  lessening 
of  his  political  hopes.  One  or  two  expressions 
I  will  briefly  notice.  First,  he  expresses  his 
willingness  "to  do  whatever  the  cause  of  the 
North-west  may  require;"  and  then  that  other 
sentence,  in  which  he  says,  "what  will  those 
of  less  pretension  do  when  the  real  contest 
comes,  when  life  and  property  depend  upon 
the  issue,  when  bullets  instead  of  ballots  are 
cast,  and  when  the  halter  is  a  preamble  to  our 
platform?  For  unless  Federal  encroachments 
are  arrested  in  the  States  by  the  effort  as  well 
of  the  Legislative  as  of  the  Executive,  then 
will  our  lives  and  fortunes  follow  where  our 
honors  will  have  gone  before."  It  seems  from 
this  that  he  was  looking  to  legitimate  sources, 
to-wit,  the  Legislative  and  Executive  authority 
of  the  .State,  for  the  arrest  of  apprehended 
encroachments. 

His  expressions  of  sympathy  for  the  North 
west,  I  contend,  are  shared  in,  to  a  great  ex 
tent,  by  men  of  all  parties,  who  have  felt  that 
her  interests  have,  by  partial  legislation,  been 
made  to  pay  tribute  to  those  of  New  England. 
Indeed,  it  was  quite  a  common  expression 
among  many  members  of  the  party  with  which 
Mr.  Milligan  acted,  that  the  burdens  of  the 
war  were  not  equally  distributed,  and  that  the 
Eastern  States  had  "not  responded  to  the  calls 
for  volunteers  with  the  same  alacrity  that  had 
distinguished  the  North-west.  Indeed,  it  will 
be  remembered,  that,  previous  to  the  date  of 
that  letter,  public  attention  was  frequently 
directed  by  the  public  journals  to  the  alleged 
fact,  that  while  Indiana  was  putting  her  118th 
Regiment  into  the  field,  Massachusetts,  with  a 
population  about  equal  to  that  of  this  State, 
was  recruiting  negroes  in  Indiana  to  fill  up 
her  54th  Regiment.  With  the  justice  of  these 
comparisons  we  have,  in  the  present  inquiry, 
nothing  to  do,  but  only  with  the  fact  that  such 
complaints  were  made.  Mr.  Milligan  was 
then  seeking  office  at  the  hands  of  those  who 
uttered  them,  and  the  expression  meant, 
simply,  that  if  he  was  elected  Governor,  he 
would  only  ask  Indiana  to  do  her  just  part; 
it  certainly  had  no  reference  to  a  North-west 
ern  Confederacy.  As  to  the  expression  about 


,  the  halter  being  a  preamble  to  the  platform, 
etc.,  it  is  clearly  referable  to  a  reported 
declaration,  said  to  have  been  made  in  a  pub 
lic  speech,  by  our  State  Executive,  shortly  be 
fore  that  time,  that  those  leading  opponents 
of  the  Administration  would  come  to  grief, 
and  their  families  suffer  want.  Whether  or 
not  the  declaration  was  ever  made,  is  unim 
portant  in  this  inquiry;  for,  whether  true  or 
false,  it  was  so  published,  and  explains  the 
phraseology  of  this  portion  of  the  letter. 

And  thus  closes  the  last  circumstance  and 
the  last  inquiry,  leaving  this  unhallowed 
prosecution  without  a  stay  or  support. 

After  an  investigation,  occupying  a  period 
of  about  two  months,  the  prosecution  having 
failed  to  establish,  by  evidence,  a  single  one 
of  the  inculpatory  circumstances  charged 
against  Mr.  Milligan,  I  am  at  a  loss  to  know" 
upon  what  principle  of  law,  morality,  or 
justice,  he  is  detained  in  a  loathsome  prison, 
under  circumstances  of  extreme  hardship. 
This  may,  perhaps,  be  considered  strong  lan 
guage,  but  knowing  personally  all  the  cir 
cumstances  of  the  case,  I  must  say  that  his 
arrest  and  confinement,  considering  his  char- 
actei',  his  physical  condition,  the  health  of  his 
family,  and  the  offer  of  his  friends  to  give 
bail  in  any  sum  that  might  be  asked  for  his 
appearance,  does  not  accord  with  that  degree 
of  civilization  which  should  characterize  a 
great  people.  Never  was  a  citizen  more  vin 
dictively  pursued.  Every  principle  held  sa 
cred  among  honorable  men  has  been  violated 
by  those  following  his  track.  Professional 
confidence,  ever  heretofore  held  sacred,  has 
been  prostituted  to  manufacture  evidence 
against  him.  His  kindly  sympathies  were 
aroused  by  a  villain,  who  only  sought  to 
betray  and  ruin  him.  Private  and  confi 
dential  correspondence  has  been  seized  and 
introduced,  in  the  vain  hope  of  finding 
some  inadvertent  treason.  And  yet  what 

[has  been  discovered?  What  fatal  act  or 
word  has  been  found?  It  is  in  evidence  that, 
nearly  a  year  ago,  Zumro  was  placed  on  his 
track  (and  I  am  compelled  to  give  its  authors 
credit  for  the  completeness  of  their  plan) — 
Zumro,  who  was  his  neighbor  and  acquaint 
ance!  In  order  to  more  effectually  blind  Mr. 
Milligan,  Zumro  was  arrested  by  the  military 
authorities,  and,  as  a  part  of  the  plan,  em 
ployed  his  unsuspecting  victim,  who  is  a  lead 
ing  lawyer  of  the  State,  to  defend  him;  and 
yet,  during  all  the  sacred  and  confidential  in 
tercourse  existing  between  attorney  and  cli 
ent,  when  all  restraint  is  ordinarily  thrown 
off,  not  a  word,  not  even  a  murmur  against 
the  Government  escaped  his  lips.  That  ear 
that  was  paid  to  listen  with  aching  interest 
for  some  unguarded  remark,  never  caught 
even  a  whisper  of  discontent;  until  finally, 
when  on  a  bed  of  perilous  sickness — the  bed 
from  which  he  was  dragged  to  his  present 
dungeon — while  delirious  with  disease  and 
drugs — that  spy  and  informer  goes  to  him  in 
the  hopes  of  hearing  some  treasonable  ex 
pression  escape  him  in  his  wild  and  incohe 
rent  ravings. 

And  now,  forgetting  for  awhile  his  terrible 
impeachment,  let  us  look  his  evidence  full  in 


2-18 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


the  face.  With  insinuating  manner,  he  squats  I 
beside  that  bed  of  sickness,  and  asks,  "What 
is  the  order  going  to  .do  about  the  draft?"  to 
which  Mr.  Milligan  replies,  "Nothing;  there 
are  no  fighting  men  about  Huntington."  But, 
unwilling  to  give  it  up,  for  his  pay  was 
shining  before  his  greedy  vision,  with  lying 
tongue  he  says,  "we  are  going  to  resist  it  if 
we  get  assistance  from  here;"  to  which,  he  in 
forms  us,  Mr.  Milligan  replied,  "It  is  as  good 
a  time  as  any,"  and  that  "if  he  was  well  and 
in  the  woods,  he  could  kill  twenty  before 
they  could  take  him."  But  in  this,  as  in  every 
thing  else,  he  is  impeached  by  Mr.  Johnson,  a 
respectable  farmer,  who  was  present  and 
heard  the  whole  conversation.  Infamous  be 
ing!  May  God  help  you,  and  never  allow 
your  children  to  know  the  deep  damnation  of 
your  infamy;  else,  from  utter  shame,  they  will 
become  vagabonds  and  outlaws  on  the  earth. 
I  have  done;  and  now,  Mr.  President  and 
officers  of  the  Commission,  I  commit  the  cause 
of  my  client  to  you.  I  have  known  him  long 
and  intimately.  For  fourteen  years  we  have 
practiced  at  the  same  bar,  and  commingled  in 
its  kindly  and  fraternal  intercourse.  With 
his  extreme  political  views  I  have  held  no 
sympathy — for  the  Sons  of  Liberty  I  have 
had  no  respect;  but  I  never  will  believe  that 
Mr.  Milligan,  either  in  act  or  heart,  is  a 
traitor.  His  life  has  already  measured  the 
span  of  fifty-two  years,  the  last  twenty  of 
which  have  been  spent  in  this  State.  With 


"an  unblemished  reputation"  (as  the  evi 
dence  shows,)  a  good,  kind  and  affectionate 
wife,  a  comfortable  home,  devoted  friends,  and 
an  enlarged  and  cultivated  mind,  he  might, 
in  ordinary  times,  laugh  to  scorn  a  charge  so 
preposterous. 

To  you,  gentlemen,  I  commit  his  reputation, 
his  liberty  and  his  life;  and,  higher  than  all, 
gentlemen,  there  is  committed  to  you  the  duty 
of  respecting  that  sacred  right — the  trial  by 
jury.  Better  let  these  defendants  go,  even 
should  you  deem  them  guilty,  than  to  strike 
at  that  glorious  old  bulwark  of  liberty!  It 
was  in  defense  of  it  that  Hampclen  fell,  that 
Sidney  bled,  that  Washington  fought,  and 
for  which  the  battle  fields  of  our  holy  Revolu 
tion  were  incarnadined  with  the  best,  blood 
of  our  patriot  fathers.  Shall  we  forget  the 
lessons  of  history?  Is  the  emergency  so 
great?  is  our  nation  in  such  deadly  peri}? 
and  have  we  become  so  insane,  as  to  think  we 
can  save  its  life  by  cutting  out  its  very  vitals? 
If  it  can  be  saved  only  by  the  sacrifice  of  con 
stitutional  liberty,  and  the  inalienable  rights 
of  our  race,  I  say  let  it  die.  But  no,  no,  it  is 
not  so.  The  God  of  our  fathers  will  not  for 
sake  us.  True,  this  nation  is  sick,  vei*y  sick — 
the  mailed  hand  of  a  foul  rebellion  has  been 
grappling  at  its  throat,  but  even  now  the  arm 
is  becoming  weak  and  palsied.  Then,  while 
we  strike  at  the  fell  fiend  of  treason,  let  us  be 
careful  that  our  dagger  may  not,  in  our  blind 
fury,  reach  the  dear  idol  of  our  hopes. 


REPLY  OF  THE  JUDGE  ADVOCATE. 


Gentlemen  of  the  Commission: 

In  closing  this  trial,  it  becomes  my  duty  to 
reply  to  the  able  addresses  or  arguments  made 
on  behalf  of  the  accused  by  their  counsel. 

These  trials  have  been  in  progress  now  since 
the  nineteenth  day  of  September.  It  has  been 
one  long,  continuous  labor,  exhausting  to  the 
Court,  to  the  counsel  for  the  defense,  and  cer 
tainly  to  myself.  The  labor  that  has  been 
required  to  develop  the  facts  given  to  this 
Court,  few  will  ever  know,  or  appreciate.  The 
responsibility  of  giving  to  you  the  facts  in 
volved  in  this  issue,  and  the  correct  law,  so 
far  as  I  was  able,  during  nearly  a  three  months' 
struggle,  has  been  solely  upon  my  shoulders, 
unaided.  I  beg  the  Court,  therefore,  to  look 
charitably  upon  those  efforts  wherein  I  have 
failed  to  do  the  cause  of  the  Government  full 
justice.  While  I  yield  to  many,  to  the  counsel 
for  the  accused,  greater  experience,  learning 
and  ability,  I  can,  and  do  claim  to  be  the  peer  of 
any  man  in  my  love  of  country,  love  of  her  glo 
rious  institutions,  and  in  my  desire  and  inflex 
ible  determination  to  deal  justly  with  all 
men. 

In  discussing  this  question,  I  hope  to  say  no 
word  that  is  not  fully  warranted  by  the  law 
and  the  evidence.  There  is  certainly  no  bit 
terness  in  my  heart  toward  any  of  these 
accused ;  they  are  all  alike  strangers  to  me. 
Their  counsel  have,  in  the  conduct  of  the  de 
fense,  ever  been  high-toned,  gallant,  courteous 
gentlemen,  able  advocates,  and  learned  in  the 
law. 

In  meeting  the  question  of  the  jurisdiction 
of  this  Court,  I  shall  make  no  plea  or  apology 
for  the  President,  or  the  Commanding  General 
of  this  District.  I  shall  claim  that  the  Presi 
dent,  in  issuing  his  proclamation  declaring 
martial  law,  suspending  the  writ  of  habeas 
corpus,  and  making  this  class  of  offenses 
punishable  by  a  military  tribunal,  acted  in 
conformity  to  the  law,  and  within  the  pro 
visions  of  the  Constitution  ;  that  his  acts  were 
warranted  and  sanctioned  by  the  Constitution; 
and  that  had  he  done  less  than  he  has  done, 
he  would  have  performed  less  than  his  whole 
duty — he  would  not  have  taken  "care  that 
the  laws  were  faithfully  executed,"  and  would 
have  been  unworthy  to  be  the  Chief  Executive 
of  this  great  nation,  and  the  Commander-in- 
Chief  of  her  armies.  Had. the  Commanding 
General  of  this  District  permitted  this  con 
spiracy  to  ripen,  to  move  forward  to  its  cul 
mination,  or  even  to  sleep  for  the  time  being, 
until,  JEtna-like,  it  belched  forth  upon  a 
sleeping  people  its  glowing,  seething,  red  tide 
of  fire  and  blood,  without  grappling  it  and 
its  leaders  with  the  strong  military  arm,  he 


would  have  been  an  Arnold,  instead  of  the 
brave  soldier  and  patriot  he  is. 

This  Court  has  jurisdiction  in  these  cases, 
and  has  a  right  to  hear,  and  pass  sentences. 

First.  Because  it  has  been  expressly  clothed 
with  that  right  and  power  by  the  authority 
competent  to  give  them;  and 

Second.  Because,  were  no  such  formal  power 
conveyed,  the  "laws  of  war,"  the  military  lex 
non  scripta,  and  the  necessity  of  the  present 
crisis,  would  clothe  this  Court  with  jurisdiction 
to  try  this  class  of  offenses. 

Then  as  to  the  express  authority.  In  Gen 
eral  Orders  No.  141,  of  the  War  Department, 
dated  September  25th,  1862,  will  be  found  the 
proclamation  of  the  President,  which  reads 
as  follows: 

WAR  DEPARTMENT,  ADJUTANT  GENERAL'S  OFFICE,  ) 
Washington,  September  25, 18C2.     / 

Genera!  Orders  No.  141. 

The  following  proclamation  by  the  President 
is  published  for  the  information  and  govern 
ment  of  the  Army,  and  all  concerned: 

BY    THE   PRESIDENT  OF   THE    UNITED   STATES    OF   AMERICA — 
A  PROCLAMATION. 

WHEREAS,  It  has  become  necessary  to  call 
into  service  not  only  volunteers,  but  also  por 
tions  of  the  militia  of  the  States  by  draft,  in  or 
der  to  suppress  the  insurrection  existing  in  the 
United  States,  and  disloyal  persons  are  not  ad 
equately  restrained  by  the  ordinary  processes 
of  law  from  hindering  this  measure,  and  from 
giving  aid  and  comfort  in  various  ways  to  the 
insurrection:  now,  therefore,  be  it  ordered: 

First.  That  during  the  existing  insurrection, 
and  as  a  necessary  measure  for  suppressing 
the  same,  all  rebels  and  insurgents,  their  aiders 
and  abettors,  within  the  United  States,  and  all 
persons  discouraging  volunteer  enlistments, 
resisting  militia  drafts,  or  guilty  of  any  dis 
loyal  practice,  affording  aid  and  comfort  to 
the  rebels  against  the  authority  of  the  United 
States,  shall  be  subject  to  martial  law,  and 
liable  to  trial  and  punishment  by  courts-mar 
tial  or  military  commission. 

Second.  That  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  is  sus 
pended  in  respect  to  all  persons  arrested,  or 
who  are  now  or  hereafter  during  the  rebellion 
shall  be  imprisoned  in  any  fort,  camp,  arsenal, 
military  prison  or  other  place  of  confinement, 
by  a«y  military  authority,  or  by  the  sentence 
of  any  court-martial  or  military  commission. 

In  witness  whereof,  I  have  hereunto  set  my 
hand,  and  caused  the  seal  of  the  United  States 
to  be  affixed. 

Done  at  the  City  of  Washington,  this  twenty- 

.-          -.     fourth  day  of  September,in  the  year 

LL-S-J  Of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight 
249 


250 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


hundred  and  sixty-two,  and  of  the  independ 
ence  of  the  United  States  the  eighty-seventh. 
ABRAHAM  LINCOLN. 

By  the  President: 

WILLIAM  H.  SEWARD,  Secretary  of  State. 

By  order  of  ttye  Secretary  of  War: 

L.  THOMAS,  Adjutant  General. 

This  proclamation,  it  will  be  seen,  covers 
many  of  the  offenses  set  forth  in  the  charges 
and  specifications.  It  expressly  says  "that 
during  the  existing  insurrection,  and  as  a 
necessary  measure  for  suppressing  the  same, 
all  rebels  and  insurgents,  their  aiders  and 
abettors  within  the  United  States,  and  all  per 
sons  discouraging  volunteer  enlistments,  re 
sisting  militia  drafts,  or  guilty  of  any  disloyal 
practice,  affording  aid  and  comfort  to  rebels 
against  the  authority  of  the  United  States, 
shall  be  subject  to  martial  law,  and  liable  to 
trial  and  punishment  by  court-martial." 

To  settle  the  question  of  jurisdiction  beyond 
all  doubt,  this  Court  has  but  to  determine 
whether  the  President  had  the  power  and  the 
right,  under  the  Constitution,  to  issue  this 
proclamation.  If  he  had  that  right  as  the 
executive  arm  of  the  Government,  or  as  Com- 
mander-in-Chief  of  her  armies,  then  Congress 
could  in  no  wise  interfere  with,  or  take  from 
a  co-ordinate  branch  of  the  Government  one 
of  its  constitutional  prerogatives.  For  it  is 
admitted  of  all  men,  that  within  the  limits 
prescribed  by  the  Constitution,  each  branch 
or  department  of  the  Government  is  su 
preme,  and  free  of  control  or  dictation  from 
either  of  the  others.  The  question  then  re 
curs,  had  the  President  the  right  to  suspend 
the  civil  law,  and  put  in  force  martial  law,  as 
against  the  class  of  offenders  designated  in 
the  paragraph  just  quoted?  I  do  not  under 
stand  that  the  gentleman  contends  against,  or 
even  questions  the  authority  of  a  commanding 
general  in  the  field  to  declare  martial  law.  In 
fact,  the  gentleman  who  has  argued  the  ques 
tion  of  jurisdiction  in  this  case,  Mr.  Gordon, 
well  stated,  in  the  Dodd  case,  that  the  army, 
wherever  it  moves,  carries  martial  law  with  it, 
without  any  proclamation.  The  proclamation, 
as  a  general  rule,  is  but  the  giving  notice  of 
a  fact  which  already  exists.  Then,  if  a  com 
manding  general  in  the  field  may,  within  the 
theater  of  his  military  operations,  or  within 
the  lines  of  his  military  command,  declare 
and  enforce  martial  law,  who  shall  be  the 
judge  of  when  and  under  what  circumstances 
this  shall  be  done  ?  Certainly  the  military 
commander  himself.  It  is  one  of  the  rights 
and  powers  incident  to  his  military  position. 
An  army  would  be  powerless  could  its  opera 
tions  be  hindered  and  stopped  by  the  processes 
of  civil  courts.  Could  the  soldiers  of  an  army 
be  taken  from  its  ranks  by  habeas  corpus,  how 
long,  think  you,  could  any  army  hold  together? 
If  by  injunction  you  could  stop  the  erection 
of  fortifications,  or  the  destruction  of  private 
property,  of  what  efficiency  would  be  the 
movements  of  your  army?  The  nearer  you 
approach  perfect,  arbitrary  power,  in  the  gov 
ernment  of  an  army,  the  greater  the  efficiency 
and  power  of  that  army.  To  make  it  effective, 
it  must  be  as  nearly  as  possible  one  will,  one 
intelligence,  governing  and  giving  direction 


to  the  entire  physical  force  under  its  control; 
and  just  in  proportion  as  you  distract  and 
divide  that  will,  that  intelligence,  you  distract 
and  divide  the  strength  and  efficiency  of  that 
army. 

The  operations  of  the  civil  law,  of  the  civil 
courts,  and  the  full  enjoyment  of  civil  rights, 
are  entirely  inconsistent  with,  and  opposed  to, 
the  operations  of  an  army.  The  rights  of  war 
and  the  rights  of  peace  are  antagonistic,  and 
can  not  co-exist;  one  must  yield  to  the  other. 
The  laws  of  war  and  the  laws  of  peace  can  not 
operate  at  one  and  the  same  time  upon  the  same 
subject-matter;  one  must  take  precedence,  and 
the  other  remain  in  abeyance.  When  a  w  ar  is 
once  in  esse,  the  civil  courts  will  take  judicial 
notice  of  the  fact,  they  should  themselves  give 
way,  and  yield  to  this  new  order  of  things. 
It  is  only  in  great  emergencies  that  the  armies 
of  a  nation  are  called  into  the  field,  that  war 
is  inaugurated;  and  when  war  is  once  inau 
gurated,  it  is  the  great,  all-absorbing,  vital 
question  to  that  nation.  Upon  the  success  of 
its  arms  depend  its  national  glory,  the  full 
enjoyment  of  the  rights  of  its  people,  and, 
generally,  its  continuance  as  a  government. 
Therefore,  and  for  this  reason,  the  civil  rights 
of  individuals,  the  powers  and  duties  exercised 
by  civil  courts,  for  the  time  being,  yield  to  this 
greater  and  more  important  interest."  The 
commanding  general,  duly  empowered  as  such, 
when  in  the  field,  has  placed  upon  him  great 
duties  and  high  responsibilities.  His  power 
should  be  adequate  to,  and  coextensive  with 
his  duties  and  responsibilities.  He  may  then, 
if  he  deem  it  necessary  for  the  success  of  the 
operations  of  his  army,  without  its  being 
claimed,  it  seems  to  me,  by  any  person,  to  be 
a  violation  of  any  of  the  provisions  of  the 
Constitution,  declare  and  enforce  martial  law; 
he  may,  at  his  will,  if  he  deem  it  necessary, 
arrest  any  person  within  his  military  limits, 
or  within  the  theater  of  his  military  opera 
tions.  If  he  may  arrest  one,  upon  the  same  hy 
pothesis  he  may  arrest  a  thousand.  The  num 
ber  is  limited  only  by  the  necessity.  While 
the  Constitution  says  no  man  shall  be  deprived 
of  life,  liberty,  or  property,  without  due  pro 
cess  of  law,  yet  it  can  not,  and  would  not  be 
claimed  that  this  would  be  an  unconstitutional 
exercise  of  his  power.  And  why?  Simply 
because  this  clause  of  the  Constitution  does 
not  refer  to  this  emergency;  it  has  reference 
to  times  of  peace,  to  the  normal  condition  of 
the  country.  So  while  private  property,  under 
the  Constitution,  is  to  be  held  inviolate,  no 
man  will  contend  but,  that  a  military  com 
mander  may  seize,  at  his  will,  all  the  forage 
and  provisions  necessary  for  the  subsistence 
of  his  army,  and  any  thing  necessary  for  its 
transportation,  or  enter  upon  any  realty  nec 
essary  for  the  encampment  of  his  troops,  or 
use  any  amount  of  private  property  necessary 
for  constructing  fortifications.  He  may  turn 
his  guns  upon  the  residence  of  any  citizen, 
loyal  though  he  may  be,  if  it  harbor  the  enemy, 
or  if  its  removal  would  render  the  movements 
of  his  army  more  efficient.  He  may  seize 
steamers  and  vessels  for  transportation;  he 
may  blow  up  bridges  and  forts;  burn  and  de 
stroy  towns  and  cities;  and  this  power  is  none 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


251 


the  less  perfect  and  unlimited  from  the  fact 
that  the  property  taken  or  destroyed  is  that 
of  a  friend,  instead  of  an  enemy.  Upon  this 
point,  Solicitor  Whiting,  in  his  pamphlet  upon 
"The  War  Powers  of  the  President,"  has  well 
said: 

"While  war  is  raging;,  many  of  the  rights 
held  sacred  by  the  Constitution — rights  which 
can  not  be  violated  by  any  acts  of  Congress — 
may  and  must  be  suspended  and  held  in  abey 
ance.  If  this  were  not  so,  the  Government 
might  itself  be  destroyed;  the  army  and 
navy  might  be  sacrificed,  and  one  part  of  the 
Constitution  would  NULLIFY  the  rest. 

11  It'  freedom  of  speech  can  not  be  suppressed, 
spies  can  not  be  caught,  imprisoned  and 
hung. 

"If  freedom  of  the  press  can  not  be  interfered 
with,  all  our  military  plans  may  be  betrayed 
to  the  enemy. 

"If  no  man  can  be  deprived  of  life  without  trial 
by  jury,  a  soldier  can  not  slay  the  enemy  in 
battle. 

"If  enemy* &  property  can  not  be  taken  without 
'due  process  of  law,'  how  can  the  soldier 
disarm  his  foe  and  seize  his  weapons  ? 

"If  no  person  can  be  arrested,  sentenced, 
and  shot,  without  trial  by  jury  in  the  county 
or  State  where  his  crime  is  alleged  to  have 
been  committed,  how  can  a  deserter  be  shot,  or 
a  spy  be  hung,  or  an  enemy  be  taken  prisoner  ? 

"It  has  been  said  that  ' amidst  arms  the  laws 
are  silent.'  It  would  be  more  just  to  say,  that 
while  war  rages,  the  rights  which  in  peace 
are  sacred,  must  and  do  give  way  to  the  higher  j 
right — the  right  of  public  safety — :the  right 
which  the  country,  the  whole  country,  claims,  to 
be  protected  from  its  enemies,  domestic  and 
foreign — from  spies,  conspirators,  and  from 
traitors.  The  sovereign  and  almost  dictato 
rial  powers — existing  only  in  actual  war; 
ending  when  war  ends — to  be  used  in  self- 
defense,  and  to  be  laid  down  when  the  occa 
sion  has  passed,  are,  while  they  last,  as  lawful, 
as  constitutional,  as  sacred,  as  the  administration 
of  justice  by  judicial  courts  in  times  of  peace. 
They  may  be  dangerous;  war  itself  is  danger 
ous  ;  but  danger  does  not  make  them  uncon 
stitutional.  If  the  Commander-in-Chief  or 
ders  the  army  to  seize  the  arms  and  ammu 
nition  of  the  enemy;  to  capture  their  per 
sons;  to  shell  out  their  batteries;  to  hang 
spies,  or  shoot  deserters;  to  destroy  the 
armed  enemy  in  open  battle;  to  send  traitors 
to  forts  and  prisons;  to  stop  the  press  from 
aiding  and  comforting  the  enemy  by  be 
traying  our  military  plans ;  to  arrest  within 
our  lines,  or  wherever  they  can  be  seized, 
persons  against  whom  there  is  reasonable 
evidence  of  their  having  aided  or  abetted  the 
rebels,  or  of  intending  so  to  do — the  preten 
sion  that  in  so  doing  he  is  violating  the  Con 
stitution,  is  not  only  erroneous,  but  it  is  a  plea 
in  behalf  of  treason.  To  set  up  the  rules  of 
civil  administration,  as  overriding  and  con 
trolling  the  laws  of  war,  is  to  aid  and  abet 
the  enemy.  It  falsifies  the  clear  meaning  of 
the  Constitution,  which  not  only  gives  the 
power,  but  makes  it  the  plain  duty  of  the  Pre 
sident,  to  go  to  war  with  the  enemy  of  his 
country.  And  the  restraints  to  which  he  is 


subject  when  in  war,  are  not  to  be  found  in  the 
municipal  regulations,  which  can  be  adminis 
tered  only  in  peace,  but  in  the  laws  and 
usages  of  nations  regulating  the  conduct  of 
war." 

Then,  while  these  powers  are  conceded  to 
a  subordinate  military  commander  in  the 
field,  with  what  consistency  can  they  be 
denied  to  his  superior,  the  Commandcr-in- 
Chief  of  all  the  armies?  Is  the  inferior 
greater  in  power  than  the  superior  ?  Is  the 
servant  greater  than  the  master  ?  The  supe 
rior  nray  order  the  inferior,  his  junior  in 
rank,  to  suspend  the  civil  law  and  declare 
martial  law.  He  may  abrogate  and  set  aside 
the  proclamation  of  an  inferior  commander 
declaring  martial  law.  All  the  acts  of  the 
inferior,  the  subordinate  commander,  receive 
their  force,  and  have  vitality  only  as  they  are 
supposed  to  emanate  froni  and  receive  the 
sanction  of  the  military  superior,  the  Com 
mander-in-Chief.  Under  the  Constitution, 
the  Commander-in-Chief  appoints  all  these 
officers;  and  when  the  Constitution  says  that 
the  President  of  the  United  States  "shall  be 
Commander-in-Chief  of  the  army  and  navy," 
that  provision  carries  with  it  all  the  necessary 
power  incident  to  such  office. 

Then  it  having  once  been  admitted  that  the 
subordinate  military  commander  can  do  these 
acts,  the  only  question  that  can  arise,  is, 
under  what  circumstances  can  he  thus  act  ? 
First,  then,  who  is  to  be  the  judge  of  when  the 
necessity  exists  for  the  Commander-in-Chief 
to  issue  his  proclamation  of  martial  law,  or 
when  he  shall  declare  that  martial  law  does 
exist? 

We  have  seen  that  in  the  field,  the  subordi 
nate  military  commander  is,  and  can  alone 
be  the  sole  judge  of  that  necessity;  and  he 
will  be  held  to  a  high  accountability  for  the 
exercise  of  a  sound  discretion  in  the  use  of 
this  despotic  power.  For  a  wanton,  or  unwar 
ranted  exercise  of  it,  he  could  be  tried  before 
a  military  tribunal;  or  on  the  restoration  of 
peace,  he  could  be  held  answerable  by  the 
aggrieved  persons,  before  a  civil  tribunal. 
The  only  limit  to  this  power  in  the  hands  of 
the  subordinate  commander,  is  the  existence 
of  the  necessity;  he  being  the  judge  of  the 
necessity  within  his  own  military  limits.  No 
stronger  rules,  or  greater  limitations,  of 
course,  would  obtain  as  against  the  Comman 
der-in-Chief.  If,  under  the  existence  of  a 
great  and  overpowering  necessity,  it  is  con 
stitutional  and  lawful  for  a  subordinate  com 
mander  to  declare  and  enforce  martial  law, 
under  the  same  circumstances,  and  with  the 
same  necessity,  the  Commander-in-Chief  can 
constitutionally  and  legally  declare  and 
enforce  martial  law.  It  is  not  as  President 
of  the  United  States,  not  as  the  Chief  Execu 
tive  of  a  great  nation,  that  he  exercises  this 
power,  this  despotic  and  arbitrary  power, 
but  it  is  as  the  Commander-in-Chief  of  her 
armies  in  time  of  war,  made  such  by  the 
express  provisions  of  the  Constitution  itself. 

In  his  judgment,  that  necessity  existed  in 
1862.  For  a  wanton,  or  unwarranted  exer 
cise  of  that  power,  he  could  have  been  im 
peached  and  tried  by  the  Senate.  He  was  the 


252 


TREASON  TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


sole  judge  of  that  necessity.  If  he  had  thought 
the  necessity  for  it  existed,  he  could  have 
issued  his  proclamation  for  the  civil  law  and 
civil  courts  to  be  entirely  suspended  through 
out  the  land  ;  or  in  part,  only,  as  the  neces 
sity  demanded.  In  these  Northern  States, 
where  branches  of  the  army  were  operating, 
where  the  civil  authorities,  though  weak,  and 
often  needing  help  from  the  military  arm, 
were  yet  dominant,  as  Commander-in-Chief, 
the  President  haj3  said  that  to  "rebel  insur 
gents,  their  aiders  and  abettors,  and  all  per 
sons  discouraging  volunteer  enlistments.,  re 
sisting  militia  drafts,  or  guilty  of  any  dis 
loyal  practice,  affording  aid  and  comfort  to 
rebels  against  the  authority  of  the  United 
States,"  the  civil  law  shall  be  silent,  and  that, 
as  to  them,  martial  law  shall  obtain.  In  all 
other  respects,  the  civil  courts  are  open  and 
the  civil  law  is  in  full  force. 

The  counsel,  in  arguing  this  question  of  ju 
risdiction,  has  treated  the  subject,  at  all  times, 
as  though  the  President,  in  putting  in  opera 
tion  the  martial  law,  must  entirely  subvert  and 
set  aside  the  civil  law  and  its  tribunals. 
This  is  an  error.  If  he  have  the  right  to  do 
it  in  whole,  he  can  do  it  in  part ;  the  greater 
includes  the  less. 

His  military  lines,  as  Commander-in-Chief 
of  the  armies  of  the  United  States,  and  the 
theater  of  the  military  operations  of  those 
armies,  are  coextensive  with  the  geographical 
lines  of  the  country.  Can  the  gentlemen 
point  to  any  State  or  Territory  that  is  not  to 
day  the  theater  of  vast  military  operations? 
He  has  cited  this  State. 

Of  the  extent  of  military  operations  here, 
of  all  interests  affecting  the  public  welfare, 
this  Court  has  a  right,  without  proof,  to  take 
judicial  notice.  On  that  subject,  Greeuleaf, 
vol.  1st,  page  7,  says : 

"In  like  manner,  the  Law  of  Nations,  and 
the  general  customs  and  usages  of  merchants, 
as  well  as  the  public  statutes  and  general 
laws  and  customs  of  their  own  country,  as 
well  ecclesiastical  as  civil,  are  recognized, 
without  proof,  by  the  courts  of  all  civilized 
nations.  *  *  *  *  *  *  * 
Neither  is  it  necessary  to  prove  things  which 
must  have  happened  according  to  the  ordi 
nary  course  of  nature ; 

nor,  any  matters  of  public  history,  affecting 
the  whole  people ;  nor,  public  matters,  affect 
ing  the  government  of  the  country." 

When  I  say  to  you,  then,  that  there  are  to 
day  in  Indianapolis  and  the  vicinity,  and 
have  been  for  the  last  six  months,  and  the 
greater  portion  of  the  time,  ever  since  1801, 
soldiers  on  duty,  preparing  for  or  returning 
from  the  field,  or  passing  through  your  city, 
in  transitu  from  other  points,  in  number  more 
than  one-half  of  the  entire  army  of  the  United 
States  previous  to  this  war,  it  will  scarcely 
be  denied  that  this  is  the  theater  of  military 
operations.  There  are  here,  to  say  nothing  of 
other  portions  of  the  State,  nearly  4,000 
troops.  This  Court  will  recognize  the  further 
fact,  that  upon  the  streets  of  this  city,  to-day, 
more  than  one-half  of  the  persons  you  meet,  are 
either  soldiers  of  the  Government,  or  persons 
in  the  military  employ  and  pay  of  the  Gov 


ernment;  and  more  than  one-half  of  the  busi 
ness  done  in  your  city  is  directly,  or  indirect 
ly,  for  our  army.  You  are  holding  in  your 
camps  here,  within  sight  of  this  city,  nearly 
5,000  prisoners  of  war,  to  capture  whom  proba 
bly  not  less  than  5,000  lives  of  loyal  men  have 
been  expended  ; — a  force  of  the  enemy  as  large 
nearly  as  either  the  army  of  General  Scott  or 
General  Taylor,  when  they  invaded  Mexico. 

But,  last  year,  the  enemy  made  a  triumphal 
march  through  a  large  portion  of  this  State. 
and  all  the  available  military  forces  of  tl.e 
State  were  called  out  to  defend  your  homes. 
At  what  hour  this  same  exigency  may  happen 
you  again,  with  the  enemy's  cannon  thunder 
ing  less  than  a  hundred  miles  from  your  bor 
der,  no  man  can  tell.  No  year  has  passed 
since  the  inauguration  of  this  rebellion,  and 
scarcely  any  month,  that  the  commanding 
officer  of  this  District  has  not  had  to  send 
military  forces  into  some  portion  of  this 
State,  to  suppress  armed  insurrection.  This 
is  a  notorious,  public  fact.  '  And  no  month 
passes,  now,  but  a  guerrilla  raid  is  announced 
from  some  of  the  river  counties.  The  theater 
of  military  operations  is  the  place  where  the 
armies  are  moving,  or  operating,  where  mili 
tary  forces  are  performing  their  legitimate 
duties ;  tried  by  this  rule,  it  can  scarcely  be 
denied,  and  certainly  not  successfully,  that 
your  State  is  the  theater  of  military  opera 
tions.  The  condition  of  things  here  is  paral 
leled  by  almost  every  other  State  in  the 
Union.  It  could  scarcely  be  otherwise  when 
the  whole  country  is  engaged  and  taking  part 
in  this  war;  when  from  an  entire  population 
of  a  little  more  than  twenty  millions  of  people 
you  draw  from  it,  by  volunteering  and  draft, 
over  two  millions  of  able-bodied  men.  As  a 
general  rule  in  voting,  you  get  but  one  vote 
for  every  six  inhabitants,  and  certainly  the 
proportion  of  men  for  the  army  would  not  be 
greater  than  of  votes.  This  army  comes  from 
every  township,  school  district,  neighborhood, 
and  almost  every  family  in  the  land.  The 
whole  land,  more  or  less,  is  making  this 
struggle  its  chief  object.  Congress  has  the 
right  to  call  into  the  field,  for  the  sake  of 
maintaining  the  life  of  the  Government,  the 
entire  physical  force  of  this  nation.  When 
once  in  the  field,  that  force  is  wielded,  con-> 
trolled  and  molded  by  but  one  will,  and  that, 
the  will  of  the  Commander-in-Chief.  How 
soon  it  may  be  necessary  to  call  upon  this 
entire  physical  force,  no  one  can  tell.  You 
certainly  have  already  in  the  service  more 
than  half  of  those  physically  able  to  bear 
arms;  and  just  in  proportion-as  you  obstruct 
and  interfere  with  the  efficiency  of  that  army, 
as  you  promote  and  protect  conspirators  and 
conspiracies,  here  in  these  States,  that  must 
furnish  the  men  for  the  armies,  and  the  mate 
rials  of  war,  just  in  that  ratio  will  the  remain 
ing  portion  of  the  able-bodied  men  be  called 
upon  and  put  into  the  field,  to  carry  this  war 
successfully  through. 

As  to  the  extent  of  this  rebellion,  its  places 
of  operation,  etc.,  Aaron  F.  IVrry,  in  his  ad 
mirable  argument  on  the  application  for  ft 
writ  of  habeas  corpus,  before  Judge  Leavitt,  in 
the  Vallandigham  case,  says: 


TREASON    TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


253 


"As  a  matter  of  course  it  can  not  be,  and  as 
a  matter  of  fact  it  is  not,  limited  to  places,  or 
described  by  geographical  descriptions.  In 
some  parts  of  the  country  it  dominates  society; 
in  other  parts  it  is  dominated  by  the  regular 
civil  administration.  We  hear  of  no  place  so 
dark  but  that  some  weak  prayers  are  uttered 
for  the  Constitution ;  and  of  no  place  so  bright 
but  that  lurking  treason  sometimes  leaves  its 
trail,  or  shows,  through  all  disguises,  its  sin 
ister  unrest. 

"The  power  and  wants  of  the  insurrection 
are  not  all,  nor  chiefly,  military.  It  needs  not 
only  food,  clothing,  arms,  medicine,  but  it 
needs  hope  and  sympathy.  It  needs  moral 
aid  to  sustain  it  against  reactionary  tenden 
cies.  It  needs  argument  to  represent  its  origin 
and  claims  to  respect  favorably  before  the 
world.  It  needs  information  concerning  the 
strength,  disposition,  and  movements  of  Gov 
ernment  forces.  It  needs  help  to  paralyze  and 
divide  opinions  among  those  who  sustain  the 
Government,  and  needs  help  to  hinder  and 
embarrass  its  councils.  It  needs  that  troops 
should  be  withheld  from  Government,  and  its 


pended  much  time  and  labor.  I  believe  this 
proclamation  to  be  in  full  force  and  effect,  and 
to  have  been  in  no  wise  interfered  with  by  act 
of  Congress,  or  by  any  subsequent  act  of  the 
President  himself.  In  this  proclamation  of 
September,  1862,  he  suspends  the  habeas  corpus, 
and  puts  in  operation,  or  rather  declares  that 
martial  law  is  in  existence  as  to  a  certain  class 
of  offenders;  saying,  in  substance,  that  the 
necessities  of  the  times  demand  that  this  class 
of  cases  shall  be  tried  by  military  courts. 
He  expressly  limits  the  operation  of  martial 
law  to  the  offenders,  or  offenses,  therein  desig 
nated. 

It  will  be  remembered  by  the  Court,  that  at 
that  time  there  was  much  cavil  and  discussion 
throughout  the  land,  as  to  whether  the  power 
to  suspend  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  under 
the  Constitution,  was  in  the  Executive  or  the 
Legislative  branch  of  the  Government.  Con 
gress  attempted  to  put  at  rest  all  question  upon 
that  subject;  and,  to  strengthen  the  arms  of 
the  President,  passed  an  act,  approved  March 
3d,  1863,  authorizing  the  President,  to  sus 
pend  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus.  It  has  always 


financial  credit  shaken.     It  needs  that  Gov-j  seemed  to  me  that  this  act  of  Congress,  to  say 
eminent  should  lack  confidence  in  itself,  and   the  best  of  it,  was  but  a  nullity;  the  Consti- 
become  discouraged.     It  needs  that  an  opinion 
should  prevail  in  the  world  that  the  Govern 


ment  is  incapable  of  success,  and  unworthy 
of  sympathy.  Who  can  help  it  in  either  par 
ticular  I  have  named,  can  help  it  as  effectually 
as  by  bearing  arms  for  it.  Wherever  in  the 
United  States  a  wish  is  entertained  to  give 
such  help,  and  such  wish  is  carried  to  its  ap 
propriate  act,  there  is  the  place  of  the  insur 
rection.  Since  all  these  helps  combine  to 
make  up  the  strength  of  the  insurrection,  war 
is  necessarily  made  upon  them  all,  when  made 


upon  the  insurrection, 
insurrectionary    forces 


Since  each  one  of  the 
holds    in    check,    or 


neutralizes  a  corresponding  Government  force, 
and  since  Government  is  in  such  extremity  as 
not  safely  to  allow  any  part  of  its  forces  to 
withdraw  from  the  struggle,  it  has  no  recourse 
but  to  strike  at  whatever  part  of  this  insur 
rection  it  shall  find  exposed." 

In  this  State  the  insurrection  is  dominated 
by  the  regular  civil  authorities;  yet  it  has  its 
existence  among  you;  it  has  its  advocates,  its 
adherents  and  abettors;  those  who  give  it  aid 
and  comfort;  those  who  would  give  it  sympathy 
and  encouragement;  those  who  carry  that  sym 
pathy  and  encouragement  into  action.  For 
the  keeping  of  this  part  of  the  insurrection, 
this  part  of  the  rebellion  in  subjection,  the 
Government  has  deemed  it  necessary  to  place 
troops  here,  and  elsewhere  in*  the  State.  To 
that  extent,  then,  certainly,  this  is  the  theater 
of  military  operations;  and,  as  I  have  said, 
this  condition  of  things  is  paralleled  in  each 
of  the  Northern  States.  It  is  a  sad  fact  that 
we  have  no  State  so  loyal  but  that  it  is  found 
nursing  in  its  bosom  spme  traitors,  some  who 
adhere  to  the  enemies  of  the  Government,  and 
give  them  active  sympathy  and  encourage 
ment. 

On  the  question  as  to  whether  the  proclama 
tion  of  the  President,  cited  in  this  case,  was 
still  in  full  force,  the  gentleman  who  has 
argued  this  question  of  jurisdiction  has  ex- 


tution  gave  this  power  either  to  the  Executive 
or  to  the  Legislative  department  of  the  Govern 


ment.  If,  under  Hie  Constitution,  it  belonged 
to  the  Executive,  then,  certainly,  it  was  simply 
a  work  of  supererogation  for  Congress  to  re- 
give  it  to  the  President:  if  it  was  given  to 
the  Legislative,  it  was  a  power  which  they 
could  not  transfer.  If,  under  the  Constitution, 
it  was  given  to  the  President,  as  I  before  re 
marked,  Congress  could  not  take  it  from  him. 
The  question,  then,  is  simply  whether  this 
power  to  suspend  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus 
belongs  to  the  President,  or  to  Congress. 

The  suspension  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus 
is  no,t  the  declaration  of  martial  law;  it  is 
more  properly  one  of  the  incidents  of  martial 
law,  or  of  a  state  of  war.  This  writ  is  to  be 
suspended  when  a  great  public  necessity  shall 
demand  it.  And  who  shall  be  the  judge  as  to 
when  that  necessity  exists? 

The  Constitution  says  "the  writ  of  habeas 
corpus  shall  not  be  suspended  unless  in  case 
of  rebellion,  or  invasion,  the  public  safety 
may  require  it;"  thus  placing  its  suspension 
upon  the  contingency  of  some  great  public 
danger  or  emergency. 

Our  legislative  body,  Congress,  usually  con 
venes  but  once  a  year,  never  oftener  than 
twice  a  year:  and  in  times  of  foreign  war, 
invasion,  or  rebellion,  would  we  dare  to  say 
that  the  Government  should  wait  the  expira 
tion  of  that  year,  or  until  Congress  could  be 
convened,  to  suspend  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus 
or  declare  martial  law?  Such  a  course  would 
be  suicidal,  and  destructive  of  the  Government 
itself.  The  power  certainly  does  rest  where 
it  properly  should  rest,  with  the  Executive  of 
the  Government;  the  Commander-in-Chief  of 
the  armies;  the  power  that  wields  the  physical 
force  that  must  defend  the  life  of  the  nation, 
if  that  life  be  in  danger.  It,  then,  being  with 
the  Executive,  Congress,  by  its  action,  in  no 
wise  changed  or  interfered  with  this  original 
prerogative  of  the  President.  It  simply  put 


254 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


at  rest  the  discussion  as  to  "where  this  power 
was  vested. 

After  the  passage  of  this  act  of  Congress, 
the  President  again  issued  a  proclamation  of 
September  15th,  1863,  entirely  suspending  the 
writ  of  habeas  corpus  throughout  the  United 
States  as  to  all  classes  of  persons  held  by 
authority  of  the  United  States,  or  charged 
with  offenses  against  the  Government.  This 
was  simply  making  larger  and  more  compre 
hensive  his  proclamation  of  September,  1862. 
It  in  no  wise  abrogated  that  proclamation,  or 
interfered  with  its  action;  it  was  confined 
purely  to  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  and  was 
made  universal  in  its  operation.  Military 
courts  were  before  given  jurisdiction,  and 
martial  law  was  declared  as  to  certain  classes 
of  offenses;  this,  certainly,  did  not  take  from 
those  courts  that  jurisdiction,  neither  ex 
pressly,  nor  by  implication;  it  did  not  inter 
fere  with  the  operations  of  martial  law,  which 
had  already  been  declared. 

As  to  the  proclamation  of  the  President  in 
Kentucky,  on  the  5th  day  of  July,  1864,  that 
was  simply  a  proclamation  which  put  into 
force  martial  law,  and  declared  that  such  a 
state  of  war  existed  in  that  State  as  to  demand 
the  entire  silence  of  civil  law;  that  martial 
law,  without  being  confined  to  any  particular 
class  of  persons  or  offenses,  should  there  be  in 
existence  in  all  its  power  and  force.  It  in  no 
wise  abrogated,  or  interfered  with,  the  procla 
mation  of  1862,  but  simply  said  that  in  that 
State  there  was  a  necessity  for  a  more  extended 
operation  of  martial  law  than  was  required 
in  other  States,  and  was  perfectly  consistent 
with  the  proclamation  of  1862,  and  also  with 
that  of  1863,  suspending  the  writ  of  habeas 
corpus.  This,  I  think,  sufficiently  answers  the 
inquiry  of  the  gentleman  as  to  why  the  proc 
lamation  of  July  5th,  1864,  was  issued. 

Finally,  as  to  the  formal  proclamation  of 
the  President,  clothing  this  Court  with  juris 
diction,  I  call  the  attention  of  the  Court 
to  Lawrence's  Wheaton  on  International  Law, 
page  522,  note,  where  the  author,  after  review 
ing  in  an  extended  article  the  statutory 
provisions  and  regulations  of  the  different. 
European  Governments  in  reference  to  the 
suspension  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  and 
the  proclamation  of  martial  law,  as  to  this 
particular  proclamation  of  September  24th, 
1862,  says:  "But,  whatever  may  be  the  infer 
ence  to  be  deduced,  either  from  constitutional 
or  international  law,  or  from  the  usages  of 
European  Governments,  as  to  the  legitimate 
depository  of  the  power  of  suspending  the  writ 
of  habeas  corpus,  the  virtual  abrogation  of  the 
judiciary  in  cases  affecting  individual  liberty, 
and  the  establishment,  as  matter  of  fact,  in  the 
United  States,  by  the  Executive  alone,  of 
nuirtiallaw — not  merely  in  the  insurrectionary 
districts  or  in  cases  of  military  occupancy, 
but  throughout  the  entire  Union,  and  not  tem 
porarily,  but  as  an  institution  as  permanent 
»s  the  insurrection  on  which  it  professes  to  be 
based,  and  capable,  on  the  same  principle,  of 
being  revived  in  all  cases  of  foreign  as  well 
as  civil  war — are  placed  beyond  question  by 
the  President's  proclamation  of  September  24, 
1862.  It  was  issued  two  days  after  the  proc 


lamation  for  the  emancipation  of  the  slaves  in 
the  insurgent  States,"  etc. 

The  counsel  for  the  accused  has  especially 
requested  me  to  answer  the  inquiry,  how  any 
department  of  this  Government — each  depart 
ment  being  limited  in  its  authority  by  its 
organic  law,  the  Constitution — can  exercise 
the  despotic  power  of  martial  law? 

I  answer  him  that  that  department  of  the 
Government  has  that  power,  which  has  been 
expressly  clothed,  by  that  organic  law,  with 
despotic  and  perfect  arbitrary  power,  in  cer 
tain  contingencies.  I  refer  to  the  President 
when  acting  as  the  military  chieftain  of  the 
armies.  As  I  have  before  stated,  the  greatest 
efficiency  of  any  army  is  achieved  when  it 
approaches  nearest  the  perfection  of  arbitrary 
and  absolute  rule;  and  that,  from  time  im 
memorial,  has  been  the  aim  of  all  military 
laws  and  regulations.  Every  nation  having 
an  army,  has  felt  that  there  should  be  but  one 
will  to  govern  that  army,  to  wield  the  physical 
force  under  its  command,  and  that  will  abso 
lute  and  untrammeled.  In  times  of  war,  the 
power  of  the  President  of  the  United  States, 
as  Commander-in-Chief  of  her  armies,  is  des 
potic  and  arbitrary;  and  must  be  so,  to  be  of 
any  efficiency  whatever — assuming,  of  course, 
that  the  objects  to  be  achieved  are  legitimate 
and  constitutional.  War  is  defined  by  Vattel 
as  "that  state  in  which  a  nation  prosecutes 
its  rights  by  force." 

"VVe  next  come  to  the  consideration  of  the 
question  of  when  martial  law  should  obtain, 
and  what  the  necessity  is  that  will  warrant 
it;  whether  that  necessity  has  existed  in  this 
country  during  this  rebellion;  whether  that 
necessity  now  exists,  so  as  to  warrant  this 
Court  to  proceed  in  these  cases;  and  whether 
the  operation  of  martial  law  is  consistent 
with,  and  known  to  the  Constitution  and  laws 
of  our  country. 

The  consideration  of  these  points,  and  their 
satisfactory  settlement,  will  also  settle  the 
second  point  upon  which  we  place  the  juris 
diction  of  this  Court,  to  wit:  that  were  no 
such  formal  power  conveyed  by  the  proclama 
tion  of  the  President,  yet  the  "laws  of  war," 
the  military  lex  non  scripta,  and  the  necessity 
of  the  present  crisis,  would  clothe  this  Court 
with  JTirisdiction  to  try  this  class  of  offenses. 
In  considering  these  questions,  I  do  not  pro 
pose  so  much  to  go  back  to  the  decisions  of  the 
dark  ages,  nor  to  untomb  the  obsolete  law  of 
a  thousand  years  ago,  nor  to  rely  so  much 
upon  English  precedents  where  the  forms  of 
that  Government  are  so  entirely  different 
from  those  of  our  own,  as  upon  the  action, 
the  precedents,  and  opinions  of  the  great,  and 
good  men  of  our  own  nation.  The  very  or 
ganizations  of  those  despotic,  kingly  Govern 
ments  would  preclude  and  almost  make  im 
possible  the  idea  that  their  action  could  be 
quoted  as  precedents  for  us.  There  the  King 
and  his  faction  were  at  war  ever  with  the 
aristocracy  and  the  people  ;  the  aristocracy 
and  their  interests  were  at  war  with  the 
King  and  the  people ;  and  the  interests  of  the 
people,  the  masses,  were  always,  and  ever, 
adverse  to  the  other  two.  At  one  time  the 
King  would  be  so  securely  enthroned,  and  so 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


255 


strongly  seated  upon  the  arms  of  his  soldiers, 
that  lie  carried  his  kingly  prerogatives  to  a 
cruel  and  oppressive  extent;  and  again,  the 
aristocracy,  the  titled  few  of  the  nation,  the 
landed  nobles  would  dominate,  and  their  inter 
ests  would  -take  precedence ;  and  then  again 
the  masses,  through  some  noble  patriot  and 
champion,  would  make  a  struggle  once  more  for 
their  rights.  The  history  of  ages  and  nations 
that  are  gone  by,  are  not,  therefore,  consistent 
precedents  for  us;  they  are  not  consistent 
with  each  other.  Here,  the  great,  controlling 
powers  and  interests  are  the  rights  of  the 
people;  no  class,  no  king,  nor  potentate  can 
maintain  interests  adverse  to  them.  It  can 
not,  however,  be  said  that  the  action  of  the 
English  Government,  or  that  the  English  prece 
dents  cited  by  the  gentleman  in  his  argument, 
are  against  the  enforcement  of  martial  law, 
as  they  do  recognize  its  existence  and  utility 
in  great  emergencies.  Most  of  the  cases 
cited  in  that  argument — replete,  as  it  is, 
with  vast  research  and  learning — are  instan 
ces  of  the  abuse  of  martial  law ;  of  the  King 
using  it  for  carrying  out  his  peculiar  and 
tyrannical  notions,  for  oppressing  some  par 
ticular  subject.  And  I  could  take  the  same 
cases  cited  by  the  gentleman  himself,  to  show 
that  in  no  century  has  any  great  emergency 
arisen,  as  civil  war  or  rebellion,  in  that 
country,  but  that  some  department  of  the 
Government  took  upon  itself  the  responsi 
bility  of  declaring  martial  law,  and  permit- 
^,ed  the  officers  of  its  army  to  act  under  its 
aegis; — in  some  instances  Parliament  declar 
ing  martial  law,  in  others  the  King  claiming 
it  as  his  peculiar  prerogative.  Most  of  the 
cases  cited  in  which  there  was  an  outcry 
against  martial  law,  were  those  in  which  the 
King,  in  time  of  peace,  had  undertaken  to  en 
force  martial  law  in  some  oppressive  manner 
against  some  particular  subject,  from  a  per 
sonal  motive.  The  most  prominent  to  which 
the  gentleman  refers  is  that  given  by  Sir 
Matthew  Hale,  in  his  history  of  the  Common 
Law,  which  reads :  "  The  exercise  of  martial 
law,  whereby  any  person  should  lose  his  life, 
member,  or  liberty,  may  not  be  permited,  in 
time  of  peace"  etc. 

And  again,  in  the  case  of  Edmund,  Earl  of 
Kent,  which  was  afterward  reversed  in  1st 
Edward  8,  the  language  used  is  as  follows: 
"That  whenever  any  subject  of  the  Lord  the 
King  shall  be  arrested  for  sedition  in  time  of 
peace,"  etc.  In  the  same  case,  also,  the  fol 
lowing  language  occurs :  *  *  *  *  * 
"Whence  it  follows  that  when  it  is  made 
known  and  manifest  that  all  the  time  during 
which  it  is  alleged  that  the  crimes  were  done, 
on  account  of  which  he  was  arrested,  to  the 
time  iV  whicl  he  was  taken  and  adjudged  to 
death,  was  a  time  of  profound  peace"  etc. 

I  shall  not  stop  now  to  refer  to  the  circum 
stances  of  the  suspension  of  the  writ  of 
habeas  corpus,  in  these  cases  in  England,  but 
simply  cite  the  gentleman's  attention  to  the 
fact  that  it  was  suspended  at 'the  time  of  the 
invasion  of  the  Pretender,  in  1715,  and  his 
Bon  in  1745,  in  Ireland  in  1800,  and  from  1802 
to  1805,  from  1807  to  1810,  in  1812,  and  from 
1822  to  1824.  I  desire,  however,  to  call  the 


attention  of  the  gentleman  and  that  of  the 
Court  to  the  action  of  the  British  Government 
in  1848; — the  action  and  speeches  of  the 
statesmen  of  that  Government,  some  of  whom 
are  still  on  the  political  stage. 

The  agitation  in  Ireland  began  to  assume 
a  threatening  aspect  directly  after  the  conti 
nental  revolutions  of  February  and  March; 
but  in  the  previous  December,  Parliament  had 
passed  an  act  forbidding  the  possession  of 
arms  in  certain  troublesome  districts.  In 
April  an  act  called  the  Felony  Bill,  was 
passed,  making  it  felony  "for  any  person  to 
compass,  imagine,  or  intend  to  depose  the 
sovereign,  or  to  levy  war  against  her."  In 
July,  the  Whig  ministry,  through  Lord  John 
ttussell,  introduced  a  bill  into  Parliament,., 
empowering  the  Lord  Lieutenant  of  Ireland, 
and  Deputies,  to  apprehend  and  detain  till 
the  1st  of  March,  1849,  such  persons  as  they 
should  suspect  of  conspiring  against  Her 
Majesty's  person  and  government.  This  was 
a  suspension  of  the  act  of  habeas  corpus  for  all 
Ireland ; — the  loyal  northern  part  of  the 
island,  as  well  as  the  disaffected  east,  and  the 
rebellious  south  and  west.  The  bill  was. in 
troduced,  and  went  through  all  its  stages  to 
its  final  passage,  in  one  day;  on  the  next  day, 
in  like  manner  it  passed  the  House  of  Lords, 
the  vote  being  unanimous  in  both  houses,  and 
on  the  same  day,  received  the  assent  of  the 
Queen.  Even  the  Irish  members  did  not  vote 
against  it.  Lord  Brougham,  in  speaking  upon 
the  bill  in  the  House  of  Lords,  said : 

"  A  friend  of  liberty  I  have  lived,  and  so  I 
shall  die — nor  do  I  care  how  soon  that  may 
be,  if  I  can  not  be  the  friend  of  liberty  with 
out  being  a  friend  of  traitors  at  the  same 
time,  without  being  a  protector  of  criminals, 
without  being  deemed  to  be  the  accomplice  of 
foul  rebellion  and  its  concomitant  civil  war, 
with  all  its  hideous  train  of  atrocious  crimes. 
It  is  because  I  am  a  friend  of  liberty  that  I 
detest  the  conspiracies  which  are  brewing  in 
the  sister  isle.  The  noble  Marquis  (Lans- 
downe)  has  informed  us  that  the  danger  is 
imminent.  Then  let  the  measure  which  in 
vests  the  Government  with  needful,  and  no 
more  than  needful  powers,  be  immediately 
adopted." 

These  words  come  home  to  us  to-day  with 
peculiar  force.  Earl  Derby,  then  Lord  Stan 
ley,  said : 

"I  think  that  the  Government  has  asked 
for  the  right  remedy.  I  think  the  remedy  for 
which  they  have  asked  is  one  which  will 
strike  the  right  persons,  and  strike  them  with 
in  the  right  time.  I  am  not  one  of  those  who 
would  seek  for  victims  among  the  credulous 
dupes  of  the  incendiary  agitators  of  Ireland — 
dupes  who  will  be  put  forward  in  the  front 
ranks  for  the  purpose  of  committing  crimes 
and  outrages.  I  do  not  desire — God  forbid 
that  I  should — that  upon  them  the  severest 
penalty  of  the  law  should  fall.  No  !  I  desire 
it  should  fall  upon  those  who,  well  knowing 
the  consequences  of  their  conduct — who,  well 
knowing  the  falseness  of  their  pretexts — who, 
well  knowing  the  fatal  effects  that  must  flow 
from  the  doctrines  they  preach,  evince  a  read 
iness  to  sacrifice  every  thing  to  their  passions 


256 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


and  their  sordid  interests,  and  for  their  own 
purposes,  do  not  hesitate  to  involve  their 
friendless  and  too  credulous  fellow'country- 
men  in  the  guilt  of  treason  and  the  danger  of 
civil  war.  The  persons  I  wish  to  see  punished 
are  those  who  have  sufficient  skill,  who  have 
sufficient  information  and  intelligence  to  keep 
themselves  free  from  such  legal  guilt  as  would 
bring  them  under  the  operation  of  the  law, 
with  the  probability  of  a  conviction,  but  who, 
nevertheless,  are  morally  guilty  in  the  eye  of 
God  and  man,  of  the  crime  of  inciting  to 
treason,  murder,  rebellion  and  civil  war.  I 
favor  the  measure  now  proposed,  chiefly  be 
cause  by  its  means  we  shall  get  rid  of  all 
doubts  and  difficulties  ;  we  shall  have  no  more 
of  these  delays  of  the  war,  no  more  of  the 
chicanery  which  encourages  evil  doers  to  hope 
for  ultimate  escape,  and  which  is  certain  to 
cause  such  procrastination  that  when,  at 
length,  the  sword  of  justice  falls,  the  example 
does  not  produce  half  the  eifect  it  ought  to 
have." 

In  the  House  of  Commons,  Lord  John  Rus 
sell  said  : 

"I  believe  in  my  conscience  that  this 
measure  is  calculated  to  prevent  insurrection, 
to  preserve  internal  peace,  to  preserve  the 
unity  of  this  empire,  to  save  the  throne  of 
these  realms  and  the  free  institutions  of  this 
country." 

Sir  Robert  Peel,  in  speaking  on  this  bill, 
said: 

"I,  for  one,  am  perfectly  prepared  to  insist 
on  no  ordinary  powers.  I  believe  that  the 
Government  is  justified  in  asking  for  this 
measure.  I  believe  the  measure  itself — the 
power  to  apprehend  on  suspicion,  and  keep 
the  conspirators  in  confinement — is  necessai-y. 
I  will  not  urge  on  the  ministry  measures  of 
greater  coercion  than  those  their  own  respon 
sibility  demands;  but  this  I  say,  as  nothing 
but  necessity  can  justify  a  suspension  of  the 
habeas  corpus  act,  the  same  necessity  makes 
immediate  action  desirable." 

Mr.  Disraeli  thought  the  House  "ought  not 
to  hesitate  to  grant  the  Government  the  great 
and  extraordinary  powers  for  which  they 
ask." 

And  Mr.  Joseph  Hume,  the  leader  of  the 
Liberals,  and  always  the  fast  friend  of  Ire 
land,  said  that  he  should  "be  sorry  to  see 
any  division  on  the  measure  now  before  the 
House." 

Martial  law  in  England  as  completely  vio 
lates  and  suspends  the  Magna  Charta  as  in 
this  country  it  does  our  Constitution.  Sec 
tion  39,  which  has  been  referred  to  by  the 
gentleman,  provides  that  "no  freeman  shall 
be  taken,  or  imprisoned,  or  disseized,  or  out 
lawed,  or  banished,  or  any  way  injured,  nor 
will  we  pass  upon  him,  nor  send  upon  him, 
unless  by  the  lawful  judgment  of  his  peers, 
or  by  the  law  of  the  land." 

The  Mutiny  Act,  of  1689— and  which  has 
been  re-enacted  at  every  session  of  Parlia 
ment  for  more  than  175  years — contains, 
among  others,  the  following  declaration  : 

"Whereas,  no  man  may  be  forejudged  of 
life  or  limb,  or  subject  to  any  kind  of  judg 
ment  by  martial  law,  or  any  other  matter 


|  than  by  the  judgment  of  his  peers,  and  ac 
cording  to  the  known  and  established  laws 
of  this  realm,"  etc.  There  is  no  doctrine  more 
ineradicably  graven  upon  the  Constitution 
and  the  civil  polity  of  England,  than  the 
writ  of  habeas  corpus  and  the  exemption  of  the 
subject  from  martial  law;  but,  notwithstand 
ing  this  clear  provision  of  the  Magna  Charta, 
as  often  as  it  has  been  necessary,  martial  law 
has  been  proclaimed. 

In  the  riots  of  1780,  after  the  mob  had  in 
sulted  a  member  of  Parliament,  and  threatened 
to  attack  the  residence  of  the  Chief  Justice,  the 
King  in  Council  issued  his  proclamation,  as 
follows: 

"We  have  therefore  issued  the  most  direct 
and  effectual  orders  to  all  our  officers,  by  an 
immediate  exertion  of  their  utmost  force,  to 
suppress  the  same."  After  which  the  Adju 
tant  General  issued  the  following  order,  to 
wit: 

"In  obedience  to  the  order  of  the  King  in 
Council,  the  military  are  to  act  without  wait 
ing  the  direction  of  the  civil  magistrate,  and 
to  use  force  for  dispersing  the  illegal  and 
tumultuous  assemblages  of  the  people." 

In  subsequent  debates  in  Parliament,  the 
conduct  of  the  King  was  approved.  Lord 
Mansfield  and  Lord  Thurlow  claimed  that  it 
was  not  a  prerogative  of  the  King  to  declare 
martial  law,  or  to  use  the  military  to  suppress 
riots,  but  they  defended  the  act  on  the  ground 
of  necessity. 

During  the  Irish  rebellion,  in  1798,  the  Lord 
Lieutenant  of  Ireland,  Lord  Camden,  pro 
claimed  martial  law,  which  existed  a  year 
without  any  legislative  action;  and  after  that, 
the  Irish  Parliament  sanctioned  the  act.  In 
1801,  after  the  Union,  this  subject  was  dis 
cussed,  and  a  bill  was  introduced  to  continue 
martial  law.  In  this  debate,  both  those  who 
approved  and  those  who  opposed  the  bill  con 
ceded  the  right  of  the  Executive  Government 
to  proclaim  martial  law  when  necessary. 
Sheridan,  who  opposed  the  bill,  said: 

"In  case  of  rebellion,  or  invasion,  His  Maj 
esty  has,  by  virtue  of  his  prerogative,  a  right 
to  martial  law." 

Lord  Castlereagh,  in  defense  of  the  bill,  said : 

"I  perfectly  understand  that  the  prerogative 
of  the  Crown  authorizes  this  act,  in  its  author 
ity  to  exercise  martial  law.  I  maintain  that 
it  is  a  constitutional  mod-e  for  the  Executive 
Government  to  exercise  martial  law  in  the 
first  instance,  and  to  come  to  Parliament  for 
indemnity  afterward,  and  is  preferable  to 
applying  to  Parliament  first."  This  is  a  some 
what  anomalous  declaration  on  the  part  of 
Lord  Castlereagh;  for  if  it  was  a  prerogative 
of  the  Crown,  and  a  constitutional  mode  of 
exercising  that  prerogative,  where  is  the  ne 
cessity  of  any  subsequent  indemnifying  act? 
He  goes  on  to  say:  "  The  only  circumstance  in 
mind  is,  whether,  if  the  necessity  exists,  this 
is  the  proper  remedy?  If  it  be  so,  we  ought 
not  to  take  alarm  at  a  departure  from  prin 
ciple,  which  is  necessary  for  the  preservation 
of  the  Constitution  itself.'' 

Sir  L.  Parsons,  in  opposing  the  bill,  said  he 
thought  "the  measure  unnecessary.  The  Ex 
ecutive  Government  could  resort  to  martial 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


257 


law    if  it    was    necessary  to  suppress  rebel 
lion." 

Mr.  Gray,  also  one  of  its  opponents,  said: 

"It  was  better  that  the  Government  should 
resort  to  what  had  been  called  (he  thought 
not  legally)  its  prerogative  of  proclaiming 
martial  law.  That  was  no  prerogative  of  the 
Crown,  but  rather  an  act  of  that  power  sanc 
tioned  by  necessity,  martial  law  being  a  sus 
pension  of  the  King's  peace.  But  it  was  better 
that  martial  law  should  proceed  from  the 
Executive  Government,  in  urgent  moments, 
than  be  the  work  of  the  Legislature,  on  very 
slight  pretexts." 

At  the  time  of  the  rebellion  in  Ceylon,  in 
1848,  the  Governor  proclaimed  martial  law, 
and  tried  and  executed  many  rebels.  Here  is 
a  case  exactly  in  point.  His  conduct  was  se 
verely  criticised  in  England,  upon  the  ground 
that  it  was  unnecessary;  and  in  an  able  review 
in  the  Quarterly,  volume  83,  page  127,  we  find 
the  following: 

"We  shall  define  martial  law  to  be  the  law 
of  necessity,  or  defense.  The  right  which  a 
Governor  of  a  colony  lias  to  proclaim  martial 
law  over  subjects,  may  be  said  to  bear  a  close 
analogy  to  the  right  which  an  individual,  in 
absence  of  legal  protection,  has  to  slay  an 
assailant.  In  both  cases,  the  evil  must  be 
grave.  In  both  cases,  all  regular  means  of 
defense  must  be  exhausted,  or  beyond  reach, 
before  the  aggrieved  party  resorts  to  extrem 
ities.  In  both  cases,  the  burden  of  proof  lies 
on  him  who  has  ventured  on  such  an  expedient; 
and  if  he  fails  to  vindicate  himself,  he  is  liable 
to  severe  punishment. 

"Hallam  1,  Constitutional  History,  page  240, 
says: 

"  'There  may,  indeed,  be  times  of  pressing 
danger,  when  the  conservation  of  all  demands 
a  sacrifice  of  the  legal  rights  of  a  few;  there 
may  be  circumstances  that  not  only  justify, 
but  compel  the  abandonment  of  constitutional 
forms.  It  has  been  usual  for  all  Governments, 
during  an  actual  rebellion,  to  proclaim  martial 
law,  or  the  suspension  of  civil  jurisdiction. 
And  this  anomaly,  I  must  admit,  is  very  far 
from  being  less  indispensable  at  such  unhappy 
seasons,  in  countries  where  the  ordinary  mode 
of  trial  is  by  jury,  than  where  the  right  of 
decision  rests  in  the  judge.'  " 

In  considering  the  opinions  and  action  of 
British  statesmen  upon  this  question,  it  should 
bo  borne  in  mind  that  there  is  an  essential 
difference  between  the  King  of  England  and 
the  President  of  the  United  States,  in  respect 
to  the  prerogatives  with  which  they  are  clothed 
by  the  constitutional  laws  of  the  respective 
nations.  The  King  of  England  is  not  the 
Commander-in-Chief  of  her  army  and  navy, 
whereas  the  President  of  the  United  States  is, 
by  express  provision  of  our  Constitution. 

Upon  the  question  of  what  martial  law  is, 
and  wherein  it  differs  from  military  law,  there 
can  "be  no  difference  of  opinion,  and  p,eed  be 
but  little  discussion.  The  rules  and  regula 
tions,  and  special  acts  of  Congress  existing 
for  the  government  of  those  persons  in  the 
military  service  of  the  country,  constitute  the 
military  law;  and  they  are  as  clear  and  well 
defined  as  any  statutes  of  the  land.  Martial 
17 


law,  on  the  contrary,  can  never  be  restricted 
by  any  defined  lines,  because  it  is  the  law  of 
necessity,  the  law  of  self-defense,  of  self- 
preservation;  it  is  a  law  to  meet  a  state  of 
disorder;  a  law  to  meet  the  exigences  and 
necessities  of  great,  unexpecied  emergencies; 
and  whatever  law,  or  rule  of  action,  becomes 
necessary  to  meet  those  emergencies,  is  martial 
law.  As,  for  illustration,  martial  law,  as  now 
being  administered,  has  given  these  prisoners 
a  fair,  impartial  hearing,  according  to  the 
strict  rules  of  the  civil  law,  in  all  questions 
of  evidence,  argument,  etc.;  it  has  given  them 
the  benefit  of  counsel,  of  processes  to  compel 
the  attendance  of  witnesses;  it  has  allowed 
them  a  clear  and  public  trial,  in  open  day, 
before  their  peers,  and  before  just  and  honor 
able  men.  But,  under  other  circumstances, 
and  greater  emergencies,  it  might  have  de 
manded  that  they  be  shot  down  in  the  streets, 
without  trial,  and  without  hearing;  as  in  case 
they  had  gone  forward  in  this  conspiracy, 
attacked  your  camps,  undertaken  to  release 
your  prisoners,  and  burn  your  city.  In  one 
case,  the  emergency  might  have  demanded 
instant  and  summary  punishment,  because 
found  in  the  act  of  insurrection;  the  other 
admits  of,  and  permits,  an  investigation  ac 
cording  to  the  forms  of  law,  to  see  whether 
the  accused  were  actually  engaged  in,  and 
moving  forward  to  the  consummation  of  an 
insurrection. 

Martial  law  should  obtain,  does  obtain,  and 
must  obtain  whenever  a  state  of  war  exists. 
Says  Vattel,  in  his  Law  of  Nations,  page  346: 
"The  whole  is  deduced  from  one  single  prin 
ciple;  from  the  object  of  a  just  war;  for, 
when  the  end  is  lawful,  he  who  has  a  right  to 
pursue  that  end,  has,  of  course,  a  right  to 
employ  all  the  means  which  are  necessary  for 
its  attainment." 

"When  the  fact  of  war  was  once  established 
throughout  this  country,  instantly,  by  reason 
of  that  fact,  were  brought  into  existence,  so 
far  as  waj  necessary,  the  laws  of  war;  and 
those  laws  were  in  operation  wherever  the 
war  was  being  prosecuted.  Wherever  the 
army  existed,  was  moving,  in  part  or  in  whole, 
or  doing  battle,  there  the  laws  of  war  took 
precedence  of  the  civil  laws,  the  laws  of  peace. 
In  some  places,  where  the  clash  of  arms  had 
made  silent  all  civil  avocations,  the  army  was 
the  controlling,  the  dominant  power:  the  laws 
of  war,  martial  law,  the  law  of  necessity,  was 
the  sole  law.  In  other  places,  where  only  a 
branch  of  the  army  was  operating,  existing, 
or  moving  in  the  general  purposes  of  war, 
some  portions  of  the  civil  law  would  continue 
in  operation:  those  only,  however,  which  were 
not  inconsistent,  with  the  existence,  move- 
merits,  or  operations  of  that  part  of  the  army. 
Of  the  necessity  that  will  warrant  the  declar 
ation  of  martial  law,  or  the  silencing  of  the 
civil  law,  in  part  or  in  whole,  the  Commander- 
in-Chief,  or  his  subordinate  military  com 
mander,  can,  and  must  be,  the  sole  judge; 
and  while  it  is  being  exercised,  it  is  the  dom 
inant  law,  and  is  just  as  much  law,  just  as 
much  constitutional  law,  as  any  portion  of 
the  civil  law.  As  I  have  before  remarked, 
the  officer  or  person  exercising  this  high  powei 


258 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


must  be,  and  always  is,  held  to  a  high  ac 
countability.  If  the  President  exercise  it,  he 
can  be  held  accountable  to  the  House  and  Sen 
ate  on  impeachment;  if  an  inferior  military 
commander,  he  can  be  held  accountable  before 
either  a  military  or  a  civil  tribunal. 

It  will  be  recollected  by  this  Court,  that  in 
May,  1861,  while  the  courts  were  open  and  in 
full  force,  one  John  Merryman,  a  citizen  of 
Maryland,  was  arrested  by  military  authority, 
and  held  by  express  sanction  and  direction  of 
the  President.  A  great  outcry  was  raised 
throughout  the  country,  by  such  men  as  Val- 
landigham,  Voorhees,  and  others,  at  this  arbi 
trary  arrest,  as  they  called  it,  and  Mr.  Val- 
landigham,  in  an  extra  session,  in  1861,  brought 
forward  in  the  House  a  resolution  of  censure 
or  impeachment  of  the  President,  for  his 
unauthorized  acts  during  the  war,  his  procla 
mations  with  reference  to  the  blockade,  calling 
out  armies  to  suppress  the  rebellion,  his  arbi 
trary  arrests,  etc.  At  this  same  session, 
August  6th,  1861,  Congress  took  action  upon 
this  subject  as  follows: 

"And  be  it  further  enacted,  That  all  the  acts, 
proclamations,  and  orders  of  the  President  of 
the  United  States  after  the  fourth  of  March, 
eighteen  hundred  and  sixty-one,  respecting 
the  army  and  navy  of  the  United  States,  and 
calling  out  or  relating  to  the  militia  or  volun 
teers  from  the  States,  are  hereby  approved 
and  in  all  respects  legalized  and  made  valid, 
to  the  same  extent,  and  with  the  same  effect 
as  if  they  had  been  issued  and  done  under  the 
previous  express  authority  and  direction  of 
the  Congress  of  the  United  States."  Vol.  12 
United  States  Statutes  at  Large,  page  326. 
Thus  says  the  law  by  which  Congress  conveyed 
to  the  President  their  approval  of  the  power 
then  exercised  by  him,  and  their  opinion  of 
its  necessity.  When  the  necessity  for  its  exer 
cise  does  exist,  and  the  authorities  act  prompt 
ly  and  vigorously  for  the  good  of  the  Govern 
ment  and  the  people,  and  for  the  preservation 
of  the  life  of  the  nation,  that  action  will  be 
justified  and  commended  by  all  good  men  ; 
for  it  can  hardly  be  said  that  the  Constitution 
did  not  contemplate  and  provide  for  the  perpe 
tuity  of  its  own  existence,  and  give  to  those 
who  were' charged  with  its  preservation  suffi 
cient  power  to  defend  its  life  in  great  emer 
gencies  ;  or  that  it  withheld  from  the  Execu 
tive,  the  vital  arm  of  the  Government,  the 
pow-er  and  the  right  to  strike  in  its  own  de 
fense,  and  for  its  very  existence. 

Some  persons,  generally  those  who  have  not 
the  best  interests  of  the  nation  at  heart,  have 
been  inclined  to  look  upon  our  Constitution 
as  a  cast  iron  frame,  incapable  of  change  or 
growth;  in  other  words,  unfitted  to  the  inev 
itable  growth  of  the  nation  ;  as  not  framed  to 
be  prospective  in  its  operations,  nor  con 
structed  to  meet  the  wants  of  an  everchang- 
ing,  increasing,  and  progressive  nation.  Or 
regard  it  as  an  iron  band  placed  about  the 
trunk  of  a  living  tree,  which  would  girdle  it 
in  its  growth,  or  be  burst  by  it.  We  are  in 
clined  to  that  liberal  and  seemingly  states 
manlike  construction  of  the  instrument  that 
believes  it  to  be  adopted  to  meet  the  exige-n- 
ces  of  the  nation  for  which  it  was  brought 


into  existence  ;  we  say  with  Solicitor  Whit 
ing : 

"  By  a  liberal  construction  of  the  Constitu 
tion,  our  Government  has  passed  through 
many  storms  unharmed.  Slaveholding  States, 
other  than  those  whose  inhabitants  originally 
formed  it,  have  found  their  way  into  the  Union, 
notwithstanding  the  guarantee  of  equal  rights 
to  all.  The  territories  of  Florida  and  Louisiana 
have  been  purchased  from  European  powers. 
Conquest  has  added  a  nation  to  our  borders. 
The  purchased  and  the  conquered  regions  are 
now  legally  a  part  of  the  United  States.  The 
admission  of  new  States  containing  a  privil 
eged  class,  the  incorporation  into  our  Union 
of  a  foreign  people,  are  held  to  be  lawful 
and  valid  by  all  the  Courts  of  the  country. 
Thus  far  from  the  old  anchorage  have  we 
sailed  under  the  flag  of  '  public  necessity,' 
'general  welfare,' or  'common  defense.'  Yet 
the  great  charter  of  our  political  rights  'still 
lives;'  and  the  question  of  to-day  is,  whether 
that  instrument,  which  has  not  prevented 
America  from  acquiring  one  country  by  pur 
chase,  and  another  by  conquest,  will  permit 
her  to  save  herself?" 

It  seems  to  me  that  our  statesmen,  hereto 
fore,  have  been  too  free  to  admit  the  limited 
and  circumscribed  powers  of  that  great  or 
ganic  law ;  but  in  support  of  this  exercise  of 
the  law  of  necessity — of  martial  law — some 
of  the  prominent  writers  of  our  country  and 
many  of  its  ablest  statesmen  have  claimed 
that  a  military  commander  would  be  author 
ized  to  disregard  the  Constitution  and  laws 
themselves,  were  it  necessary  to  the  preserva 
tion  of  the  republic  ;  and  there  is  no  doubt 
but  that  the  government  de  facto  would  be  en 
tirely  upheld  and  sanctioned  in  the  exercise 
of  such  a  power. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  while  General 
Jackson  was  in  command  of  New  Orleans,  in 
1814,  when  the  British  were  besieging  that 
city,  he  declared  martial  law ;  believing  that 
the  safety  of  the  city,  and  the  safety  and  wel 
fare  of  the  citizens  demanded  it,  and  that  it 
was  necessary  for  his  successful  defense  of 
the  same.  While  in  command  of  the  city,  the 
General  arrested  a  Frenchman  named  Loual- 
ler,  on  a  charge  of  instigating  treason  and 
mutiny,  and  for  conspiring  with  other  trea 
sonable  persons  in.  the  city,  to  aid  the  enemy. 
Without  affidavit,  presentment,  or  indictment, 
he  arrested  this  man,  threw  him  into  prison, 
and  held  him.  Judge  Hall,  the  United  States 
District  Judge  for  that  District,  on  the  5th 
day  of  March,  1815,  issued  a  writ  of  habeas 
corpus  directed  to  General  Jackson,  requiring 
him  to  answer  in  person,  and  bring  the  per 
son  of  Louallier  before  him.  General  Jack 
son,  instead  of  obeying  the  writ,  arrested  this 
Judge  of  the  United  States  Court,  and  by  mil 
itary  force,  without  hearing  or  trial,  held  him 
for  a  time  as  prisoner,  and  finally  sent  him 
beyond  his  lines.  Here  was  the  declaration  of 
martial  law,  its  rigid  enforcement,  arbitrary 
arrest,  and  punishment  without  any  form  of 
trial,  by  that  old  patriot  General  Jackson, 
whose  heroic  deeds  and  name  are  enshrined  in 
the  hearts  of  all  who  love  their  country. 

After  the  city  was  saved,  and  that  glorious 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


259 


battle  of  New  Orleans — which  will  ever  make 
the  name  of  Jackson  immortal — was  closed, 
and  the  enemy  had  withdrawn  from  the  envi 
rons  of  the  city,  the  necessity  for  martia1 
law  no  longer  existed,  and  General  Jackson, 
by  public  proclamation,  abrogated  it.  Judge 
Hall  then  returned  to  the  city  ;  had  General 
Jackson  brought  before  him  on  a  charge  of 
contempt  of  Court,  for  refusing  to  obey  the 
writ  of  habeas  corpus,  and  fined  him  $1,000. 
The  necessity,  as  before  stated,  for  martial 
law  having  passed  away,  and  the  majesty  of 
the  civil  law  having  again  asserted  itself,  the 
General  bowed  in  submission  to  its  mandates. 
His  army,  and  the  loyal  citizens  of  New  Or 
leans,  were  so  indignant  and  so  outraged  by 
this  conduct  of  Judge  Hall,  that  it  was  only 
through  the  efforts  of  General  Jackson  him 
self,  that  the  Judge  was  saved  from  personal 
violence. 

In  the  winter  of  1843-4,  on  a  resolution  to 
refund  to  General  Jackson  this  excessive  fine, 
the  whole  question  of  martial  law  was  fully 
discussed  by  Congress.  On  January  7th, 
Stephen  A.  Douglas,  that  clear-headed  lawyer, 
patriot  and  statesman,  reviewed  the  whole 
subject  in  an  able  speech,  from  which  I  pro 
pose  to  make  a  few  extracts.  He  says  : 

"  To  refuse  to  pass  it,  [the  bill  for  refund 
ing  the  fine,]  would  be  an  act  of  the  grossest 
injustice  to  the  American  people,  and  would 
stamp  them  with  ingratitude  to  their  bravest 
defender.  I  am  not  one  to  admit  that  General 
Jackson  violated  the  Constitution,  or  the  law, 
at  New  Orleans.  I  deny  that  he  violated 
either.  I  insist  that  the  General  rightfully 
performed  every  act  that  his  duty  required, 
and  that  his  right  to  declare  martial  law,  and 
enforce  it,  resulted  from  the  same  source,  and 
rested  on  the  same  principle,  that  the  gentle 
man  from  New  York  [Mr.  Barnard]  asserted, 
from  which  Judge  Hall  derived  the  authority 
to  punish  for  contempt,  without  trial,  without 
witnesses,  without  jury,  and  without  any 
thing  but  his  own  arbitrary  will.  The  gen 
tleman  asserted  that  the  power  to  punish  for 
contempt  was  not  conferred  by  the  statute,  or 
by  the  common  law,  but  was  inherent  in 
every  judicial  tribunal  and  legislative  body; 
and  he  cited  the  authority  of  the  Supreme 
Court  to  support  the  assertion.  He  said  that 
this  power  was  necessary  to  the  Courts,  to  ena 
ble  them  to  perform  the  duties  which  the  laws 
intrusted  to  them,  and  arose  from  the  neces 
sity  of  the  case.  Now,  it  was  from  the  same 
source  that  the  power  to  declare  martial  law 
was  derived — its  necessity  in  time  of  war  for 
the  defense  of  the  country.  The  defense  of  the 
lives  and  liberties  of  the  people,  as  well  as  their 
property,  being  all  intrusted  to  the  discretion 
of  the  commanding  General,  it  became  his  duty 
to  declare  martial  law,  if  the  necessity  of  the 
case  required  it.  If  itbecame  necessary  to  blow 
up  a  fort,  he  was  authorised  to  do  it;  if  it  became 
necessary  to  sink  a  vessel,  he  was  authorized 
to  do  it;  and  if  it  became  necessary  to  burn 
a  city,  he  was  authorized  to  do  it.  The  neces 
sity  of  the  case  was  the  law  to  govern  him : 
and  he,  on  his  responsibility,  must  judge  of 
the  existence  of  that  necessity.  It  was  the 
first  law  of  nature  which  authorized  a  man  to 


defend  his  own  person,  and  his  wife  and  his 
children  at  all  hazards.  It  was  that  law 
which  authorized  this  body  to  repel  aggres 
sion  and  insult,  and  protect  itself  in  the  exer 
cise  of  its  legislative  functions;  and  it  was 
that  law  which  .authorized  courts  of  justice 
to  defend  themselves  and  punish  for  con 
tempts.  He  acknowledged  that  this  was  a 
high-handed  and  despotic  power — one  that 
was  only  to  be  exercised  when  necessary,  and 
which  ceased  when  the  necessity  no  longer 
existed.  Such  was  the  power  under  which 
General  Jackson  declared  martial  law  at  New 
Orleans.  On  this  part  of  the  subject  he  did 
not  intend  to  go  into  the  history  of  all  the 
occurrences  of  that  period — they  had  been 
detailed  in  a  most  faithful  and  interesting 
manner,  by  the  gentleman  from  Louisiana, 
[Mr.  Slidell.]  It  was  sufficient  for  him  to 
know  that  General  Jackson,  who  was  the 
commanding  General,  deemed  it  necessary  to 
declare  martial  law  in  order  to  defend  the 
city."  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *•  * 
"These  things  would  not  be  questioned.  The 
necessity  and  the  glorious  effects  resulting 
from  the  course  which  that  necessity  prompted 
were  acknowledged  by  the  whole  country, 
and  he  would  even  say  by  the  whole  civilized 
world.  Then,  as  far  as  this  bill  was  concerned, 
he  [Mr.  D.]  cared  not  whether  their  acts  were 
legal  or  illegal.  He  cared  not  whether  Gen 
eral  Jackson  violated  the  Constitution  or  not. 
He  cared  not  whether  General  Jackson  sus 
pended  all  civil  authority  or  not.  If  his  acts 
were  necessary  to  the  defense  of  the  country, 
that  necessity  was  above  all  law.  General 
Jackson  hazarded  every  thing;  he  hazarded 
both  life  and  reputation  on  that  step,  which 
might  render  him  immortal  if  it  saved  the 
country,  or,  on  the  contrary,  make  him  igno 
minious,  and  a  by-word,  and  a  reproach*  and 
the  man  that  dared  to  do  that,  deserved  the 
protection  and  the  plaudits  of  his  country. 
He  did  not  envy  the  feelings  of  that  man  that 
would  get  up  and  talk  calmly  and  coolly 
under  such  circumstances,  about  rules  of 
Court  and  technicalities  of  proceeding,  and 
the  danger  of  example,  when  the  city  might 
be  in  flames  and  the  utmost  barbarity  might 
be  committed.  What  were  rules  of  Court  but 
mere  cobwebs  when  they  found  an  enemy 
with  his  cannon  at  the  doors  of  their  Courts, 
and  when  they  saw  the  flames  encircling  the 
cupola?  Talk  then  about  rules  of  Court,  and 
the  formality  of  proceedings  !  The  man  that 
would  do  this,  would  fiddle  while  the  capital 
was  burning.  He  envied  not  any  man  the 
possession  of  such  stoical  philosophy.  Talk 
about  illegality!  Talk  about  formalities!  Why, 
there  was  "but  one  formality  to  be  observed; 
and  that  was  the  formality  of  directing  the 
cannon,  and  destroying  the  enemy,  regardless 
of  the  means  whether  it  be  by  the  seizure  of 
cotton  bags,  or  the  seizure  of  persons,  if  the 
necessity  of  the  case  required  it.  The  God  of 
nature  has  conferred  this  right  on  men  arid 
nations;  and  therefore  let  him  not  be  told 
that  it  was  unconstitutional.  To  defend  the 
country,  let  him  not  be  told  that  it  was  un 
constitutional  to  use  the  proper  means.  The 
Constitution  was  adopted  for  the  protection  of 


260 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


the  country;  and  under  that  Constitution  the 
nation  had  the  right  to  exercise  all  the  powers 
that  were  necessary  for  the  protection  of  the 
country.  If  martial  law  was  necessary  to  the  sal 
vation  of  the  country,  martial  law  was  legal  for 
that  purpose.  If  it  was  necessary  for  a  judge, 
for  the  preservation  of  order,  to  punish  for 
contempt,  he  thought  it  was  necessary  for  a 
general  to  exercise  control  over  his  cannon, 
to  imprison  traitors,  and  to  arrest  spies,  and 
to  intercept  communications  with  the  enemy. 
If  this  was  necessary,  all  this  was  legal. 

"But  the  ground  on  which  he  placed  the 
defense — and  he  denied  that  General  Jackson 
did  any  act  which  wras  not  justified  by  right 
ful  and  legal  authority — was  as  high  and  as 
sacred  as  self-defense.  General  Jackson  did 
not  exercise  any  unnecessary  arbitrary  au 
thority.  He  did  not  suspend  the  civil  law 
nor  close  the  civil  tribunals,  any  farther  than 
was  necessary  for  the  carrying  out  of  the  mil 
itary  defense  of  the  country.  To  this  extent 
he  did  do  it,  and  to  this  extent  it  was  right  that 
he  should  do  it.  In  other  respects,  the  civil  law, 
and  the  courts  were  in  full  force.  True,  Gen 
eral  Jackson  would  not  allow  them  to  commu 
nicate  with  the  enemy ;  but  they  could  not 
surrender  aught  to  the  enemy  ;  he  deprived 
them  of  the  power  to  commit  treason ;  but  he 
deprived  them  of  no  power  that  an  honest 
man  would  desire  to  exercise.  He  imposed  no 
restraint  that  any  man  devoted  to  the  country 
would  regret;  and  the  men  who  instigated 
proceedings  against  General  Jackson  were 
the  men  who  skulked  in  the  hour  of  danger." 
See  Globe  Report  of  the  28th  Congress,  first 
session. 

Robert  J.  Walker,  in  the  Senate,  submitted 
a  report  upon  this  subject,  in  which  he  said: 

"The  law  which  justified  this  act,  was  the 
great  law  of  necessity;  it  was  the  law  of  self- 
defense.  This  great  law  of  necessity — of  de 
fense  of  self,  of  home,  and  of  country — never 
was  designed  to  be  abrogated  by  any  statute, 
or  by  any  Constitution." 

Mr.  Payne,  of  Alabama,  also  speaking  upon 
this  subject,  said: 

"I  shall  not  contend  that  the  Constitution 
or  laws  of  the  United  States  authorize  the 
declaration  of  martial  law  by  any  authority 
whatever;  on  the  contrary,  it  is  unknown  to 
the  Constitution  orlaws."  And  commenting  on> 
the  argument  that  if  the  Constitution  did  not 
authorize  it,  the  General  ought  not  to  have 
declared  martial  law,  he  says : 

"Who  could  tolerate  this  idea?  An  Arnold 
might,  but  no  patriotic  American  could.  I 
may  be  asked  upon  what  principle  a  com 
mander  can  declare  martial  law,  when  it  is 
so  evident  that  the  Constitution  or  laws  afford 
him  no  authority  to  do  so?  I  answer,  upon 
the  principle  of  self-defense,  which  rises  par 
amount  to  all  written  laws;  and  the  justifica 
tion  of  the  officer  who  assumes  the  responsi 
bility  of  acting  on  that  principle,  must  rest 
upon  the  necessity  of  the  case." 

In  a  written  document  submitted  by  General 
Jackson  to  the  Court,  Mr.  Livingston  gave  his 
opinion  as  follows: 

"On  the  nature  and  effect  of  the  proclama 
tion  of  martial  law  by  Major  General  Jackson, 


my  opinion  is  that  such  proclamation  is  un 
known  to  the  Constitution  and  laws  of  the 
United  States;  that  it  is  to  be  justified  only  by 
the  necessities  of  the  case;"  etc. 

With  Mr.  Payne  and  Mr.  Livingston  I  can 
not  fully  agree.  I  believe  the  power  exercised 
by  General  Jackson,  or  by  any  military  com 
mander  in  any  great  emergency — in  the  de 
fense  of  a  city,  of  a  people,  or  the  nation  itself — 
is  expressly  authorized  and  sanctioned  by  the 
Constitution,  by  that  provision  which  makes 
the  President  Commander-in-Chief  of  the 
armies,  and  that  other  provision  which  charges 
him  to  take  care  that  the  laws  be  faithfully 
executed.  In  a  lesser  degree,  the  same  power 
may  be  constitutionally  exercised  by  a  subor 
dinate  military  commander. 

And  Congress  sanctioned  this  view  of  the 
case,  by  refunding  to  General  Jackson  this 
fine,  with  full  interest;  every  Democratic 
member  of  Congress  and  many  of  the  Whigs, 
voting  for  it.  It  was  passed  in  the  House, 
January  8th,  1844,  by  the  unparalleled  ma 
jority  of  158  to  28,  and  in  the  Senate,  by  30 
to  16. 

Thomas  Jefferson,  in  his  letter  to  Mr.  Colvin, 
dated  September  20th,  1810,  (see  Jefferson's 
Complete  Works,  volume  5),  has  also  very  fully 
discussed  this  question.  In  speaking  of  the 
action  of  General  Wilkinson,  at  New  Orleans, 
he  instances  cases  almost  exactly  parallel  to 
those  in1  hand.  The  cases  were  not  as  strong 
as  these,  for  no  war  was  in  actual  existence, 
no  actual  rebellion  holding  at  bay  the  entire 
Government,  but  only  the  expectancy  of  an 
insurrection  or  rebellion;  and  yet  Jefferson 
justifies  Wilkinson  in  seizing  notorious  con 
spirators  within  his  limits,  and  sending  them 
beyond  his  lines,  without  trial  or  hearing,  to 
the  seat  of  Government,  when  they  had  a  right, 
by  the  terms  of  the  Constitution,  to  trial  in 
the  district  in  which  their  offenses  were  com 
mitted,  and  says  that  there  can  be  but  two 
opinions  upon  this  question,  that  of  the  guilty 
and  their  accomplices,  and  that  of  all  honest 
men. 

"The  question  you  propose,  whether  circum 
stances  do  not  sometimes  occur  which  make 
it  a  duty  in  officers  of  high  trust,  to  assume 
authorities  beyond  the  law,  is  easy  of  solution 
in  principle,  but  sometimes  embarrassing  in 
practice.  A  strict  observance  of  the  written 
laws,  is  doubtless  one  of  the  high  duties  of  a 
good  citizen,  but  it  is  not  the  highest.  The  laws 
of  necessity,  of  self-preservation,  of  saving 
our  country  when  in  danger,  are  of  higher 
obligation.  To  lose  our  country  by  a  scrupu 
lous  adherence  to  written  law.  would  be  to 
lose  the  law  itself,  with  life,  liberty,  property, 
and  all  those  who  are  enjoying  them  with  us; 
thus  absurdly  sacrificing  the  end  to  the  means. 
When,  in  the  battle  of  Germantown,  General 
Washington's  army  was  annoyed  from  Chew's 
house,  he  did  not  hesitate  to  plant  his  cannon 
against  it,  although  the  property  of  a  citizen. 
When  he  besieged  Yorktown,  he  leveled  the 
suburbs,  feeling  that  the  laws  of  property 
must  be  postponed  to  the  safety  of  the  nation. 
While  the  army  was  before  York,  the  Governor 
of  Virginia  took  horses,  carriages,  provisions, 
and  even  men,  by  force,  to  enable  that  army 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


261 


to  stay  together  till  it  could  master  the  public 
enemy;  and  he  was  justified.  A  ship  at  sea, 
in  distress  for  provisions,  meets  another  hav 
ing  abundance,  yet  refusing  a  supply;  the 
law  of  self-preservation  authorizes  the  dis 
tressed  to  take  a  supply  by  force.  In  all  these 
cases,  the  unwritten  laws  of  necessity,  of  self- 
preservation,  and  of  the  public  safety,  control 
the  written  laws  of  mcum  and  tuinn.  *  *  # 
"  To  proceed  to  the  conspiracy  of  Burr,  and 
particularly  to  General  Wilkinson's  situation 
in  New  Orleans.  In  judging  this  case  we  are 
bound  to  consider  the  state  of  the  information, 
correct  and  incorrect,  which  he  then  possessed. 
He  expected  Burr  and  his  band  from  above,  a 
British  fleet  from  below,  and  he  knew  there 
was  a  formidable  conspiracy  within  the  city. 
Under  these  circumstances,  was  he  justifiable, 
1st,  in  seizing  notorious  conspirators  ?  On 
this  there  can  be  but  two  opinions;  one,  of 
the  guilty  and  their  accomplices;  the  other, 
that  of  all  honest  men.  2d.  In  sending  them 
to  the  seat  of  Government,  when  the  written 
law  gave  them  a  right  to  trial  in  the  territory  ? 
The  danger  of  their  rescue,  of  their  continu 
ing  their  machinations,  the  tardiness  and 
weakness  of  the  law,  apathy  of  the  judges, 
active  patronage  of  the  whole  tribe  of  lawyers, 
unknown  disposition  of  the  juries,  an  hourly 
expectation  of  the  enemy,  salvation  of  the 
city,  and  of  the  Union  itself,  which  would 
have  been  convulsed  to  its  center,  had  that 
conspiracy  succeeded;  all  these  constituted  a 
law  of  necessity  and  self-preservation,  and 
rendered  the  satus  populi  supreme  over  the 
written  law.  The  officer  who  is  called  to  act 
on  this  superior  ground,  does  indeed  risk 
himself  on  the  justice  of  the  controlling  powers 
of  the  Constitution,  and  his  station  makes  it 
his  duty  to  incur  that  risk.  But  those  con 
trolling  powers,  and  his  fellow  citizens  gen 
erally,  are  bound  to  judge  according  to  the 
circumstances  under  which  he  acted." 

I  refer  the  gentleman  to  these  well  digested 
and  unequivocal  utterances  of  the  President 
of  the  United  States — I  might  say  one  of  the 
founders  of  the  Government — and  one  of  the 
most  learned  expounders  of  the  Constitution, 
as  an  answer  to  why  these  arrests?  and  where 
the  jurisdiction  of  this  Court? 

In  a  debate  in  Congress,  on  the  joint  resolu 
tions  of  distributing  rations  to  the  distressed 
refugees  from  Indian  hostilities,  on  the  26th 
of  May,  18;W,  John  Quincy  Adams,  in  speaking 
upon  the  subject  of  the  war  power  of  Congress 
and  of  the  President,  said: 

"Now,  the  powers  incidental  to  war  are 
derived,  not  from  their  internal  municipal 
source,  but  from  the  laws  and  usages  of  nations. 
'•There  are.  then.  Mr.  Chairman,  in  the  au 
thority  of  Congress  and  of  the.  Executive,,  two  classes 
of  powers,  altogether  different  in  their  nature,  an  d 
often  incompatible  with  each  other — the  war  poivc.r 
and  the  peace  poivsr.  The  peace  power  is  limited 
by  regulations  and  restricted  by  provisions 
prescribed  within  the  Constitution  itself.  The 
tear  power  is  limited  only  by  the  laws  and 
usages  of  nations.  This  power  is  tremendous; 
it  is  strictly  constitutional,  but  it  breaks  down  every 
barrier  so  anxiously  erected  for  the  protection  of 
liberty,  of  property,  and  of  life. 


*  *  There  are,  indeed,  powers 
of  peace  conferred  upon  Congress  which  also 
come  within  the  scope  and  jurisdiction  of  the 
laws  of  nations,  such  as  the  negotiation  of  trea 
ties  of  amity  and  commerce,  the  interchange 
of  public  ministers  and  consuls,  and  all  the 
personal  and  social  intercourse  between  the 
individual  inhabitants  of  the  United  States 
and  foreign  nations,  and  the  Indian  tribes, 
which  require  the  interposition  of  any  law. 
But  the  powers  of  war  are  all  regulated  by  the 
laws  of  nations,  and  are  subject  to  no  other  lim 
itation"  Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  all  the  power 
claimed  for  the  President  as  Commander-in- 
Chief  of  the  armies,  or  for  his  subordinate 
military  commanders,  is  more  than  conceded 
by  this  great  statesman.  In  speaking  upon 
this  same  subject,  Solicitor  Whiting,  in  the 
pamphlet  from  which  I  have  already  quoted, 
foi'cibly  says: 

"Some  persons  havequestioned  whethertitle 
passes  in  this  country  by  capture  or  confisca 
tion,  by  reason  of  some  of  the  limiting  clauses 
of  the  Constitution ;  and  others  have  gone  so  far 
as  to  assert  that  all  the  proceedings  under  mar 
tial  law,  such  as  capturing  enemy's  property, 
imprisonmentof  spies  and  traitors,  and  seizures 
of  articles  contraband  of  war,  and  suspending 
the  habeas  corpus,  are  in  violation  of  the  Con 
stitution,  which  declares  that  no  man  shall  be 
deprived  of  life,  liberty,  or  property  without 
due  process  of  law;  that  private  property  shall 
not  be  taken  for  public  use  without  just  com 
pensation;  that  unreasonable  searches  and 
seizures  shall  not  be  made;  that  freedom  of 
speech  and  of  the  press  shall  not  be  abridged; 
and  that  the  right  of  the  people  to  keep  and 
bear  arms  shall  not  be  infringed. 

"If  these  rules  are  applicable  to  a  state  of 
war,  then  capture  of  property  is  illegal,  and 
does  not  pass  a  title;  no  defensive  war  can  be 
carried  on;  no  rebellion  can  be  suppressed; 
no  invasion  can  be  repelled;  the  army  of  the 
United  States,  when  called  into  the  field,  can 
io  no  act  of  hostility.  Not  a  gun  can  be  fired 
constitutionally,  because  it  might  deprive  a  rebel 
foe  of  his  life  without  due  process  of  law — 
firing  a  gun  not  being  deemed  .a  'due  pi'ocess 
of  law.'  *  *  *  *  *  *  If 'these  rules 
above  cited  have  any  application  in  time  of 
war,  the  United  States  can  not  protect  each  of 
the  States  from  invasion  by  citizens  of  other 
States,  nor  against  domestic  violence;  nor  can 
he  army,  or  militia,  or  navy  be  used  for  any 
of  the  purposes  for  which  the  Constitution 
authorizes  or  requires  their  employment.  If 
all  men  have  the  right  to  'keep  and  bear 
arms,'  what  right  has  the  army  of  the  Union 
to  take  them  away  from  rebels?  If  'no  one 
can  constitutionally  be  deprived  of  life,  lib 
erty,  or  property  without  due  process  of  law,' 
by  what  right  does  Government  seize  and 
imprison  traitors?  By  what  right  docs  the 
army  kill  rebels  in  arms,  or  burn  up  their 
military  stores?  If  the  only  way  of  dealing 
constitutionally  with  rebels  in  arms  is  to  go 
to  law  with  them,  the  President  should  con 
vert  his  army  into  lawyers,  justices  of  the 
peace,  and  constables,  and  serve  'summonses 
to  appear  and  answer  to  complaints,'  instead 
of  a  summons  to  surrender.  He  should  send 


262 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


'GREETINGS'  instead  of  sending  rifle  shot. 
He  should  load  his  caissons  with  'pleas  in 
abatement  and  demurrers,'  instead  of  thirty- 
two  pound  shell  and  grape  shot.  In  short, 
he  should  levy  writs  of  execution,  instead  of 
levying  war.  On  the  contrary,  the  Com- 
mander-in-Chief  proposes  a  diiferent  applica 
tion  of  the  due  process  of  law.  His  sum 
mons  is,  that  rebels  should  lay  down  their 
arms;  his  pleas  are  batteries  and  gunboats; 
his  arguments  are  hot  shot,  and  'always  to 
the  point;'  and  when  his  fearful  execution  is 
'  levied  on  the  body,'  all  that  is  left  will  be 
for  the  undertaker. 

"The  clauses  which  have  been  cited  from 
the  amendments  to  the  Constitution  were 
intended  as  declarations  of  peaceful  and  loyal 
citizens,  and  safeguards  in  the  administra 
tion  of  justice  by  the  civil  tribunals;  but  it 
was  necessary,  in  order  to  give  the  Govern 
ment  the  means  of  defending  itself  against 
domestic  or  foreign  enemies,  to  maintain  its 
authority  and  dignity,  and  to  enforce  obedi 
ence  to  its  laws,  that  it  should  have  unlim 
ited  war  powers;  and  it  must  not  be  forgotten 
that  the  same  authority  which  provides  those 
safeguards,  and  guarantees  those  rights,  also 
imposes  upon  the  President  and  Congress  the 
duty  of  so  carrying  on  Avar  as  of  necessity  to 
supersede  and  hold  in  temporary  suspense, 
such  civil  rights  as  may  prove  inconsistent 
with  the  complete  and  effectual  exercise  of 
such  war  powers,  and  of  the  belligerent  rights 
resulting  from  them.  *  *  *  *  *  By 
martial  law,  loyal  citizens  may  be  for  a  time 
debarred  from  enjoying  the  rights  they  would 
be  entitled  to  in  time  of  peace.  Individual 
rights  must  always  be  held  subject  to  the  exi 
gences  of  national  safety. 

"In  war,  when  martial  law  is  in  force,  the 
laws  of  war  are  the  laws  which  the  Constitu 
tion  expressly  authorizes  and  requires  to  be 
enforced.  The  Constitution,  when  it  calls 
into  action  martial  law,  for  the  time  changes 
civil  rights,  or  rights  which  the  citizen  would 
be  entitled  to  in  peace,  because  the  rights  of 
persons  in  one  of  these  cases  are  totally  in 
compatible  with  the  obligations  of  persons  in 
the  other.  Peace  and  war  can  not  exist  to 
gether — the  laws  of  peace  and  war  can  not 
operate  together ;  the  rights  and  procedures 
of  peaceful  times  are  incompatible  with  those 
of  war.  It  is  an  obvious,  but  pernicious  error 
to  suppose  that  in  a  state  of  war,  the  rules  of 
martial  law,  and  the  consequent  modification 
of  the  rights,  duties  and  obligations  of  citi 
zens,  private  and  public,  are  not  authorized 
strictly  under  the  Constitution." 

Attorney  General  Bates,  on  the  5th  of  July, 
1861,  transmitted  to  the  House,  in  answer  to 
a  resolution  of  that  body,  an  opinion  based 
upon  certain  questions,  one  of  which  was  as 
follows  :  "In  the  present  time  of  a  great  and 
dangerous  insurrection,  has  the  President 
the  discretionary  power  to  cause  to  be  arrested 
and  held  in  custody  persons  known  to  have 
criminal  intercourse  with  the  insurgents,  or 
persons  against  whom  there  is  probable  cause 
for  suspicion  of  such  criminal  complicity?" 
In  answer  to  this,  and  to  other  questions  pro 
pounded  by  the  House,  he  says : 


"  The  argument  maybe  briefly  stated,  thus: 
It  is  the  President's  bounden  duty  to  put 
down  the  insurrection,  as  (in  the  language  of 
the  act  of  1795)  the  'combinations  are  too 
powerful  to  be  suppressed  by  the  ordinary 
course  of  judicial  proceedings,  or  by  the  pow 
ers  vested  in  the  marshals.'  And  this  duty 
is  imposed  upon  the  President  for  the  very 
reason  that  the  courts  and  the  marshals  are 
too  weak  to  perform  it.  The  manner  in  which 
he  shall  perform  that  duty  is  not  prescribed 
by  any  law,  but  the  means  of  performing  it 
are  given  in  the  plain  language  of  the  stat 
utes,  and  they  are  all  means  of  force — the 
militia,  the  army,  and  the  navy.  The  end, 
the  suppression  of  the  insurrection,  is  required 
of  him;  the  means  and  instruments  to  sup 
press  it  are  lawfully  in  his  hands;  but  the 
manner  in  which  he  shall  use  them  is  not  pre 
scribed,  and  could  not  be  prescribed  without 
a  foreknowledge  of  all  the  future  changes 
and  contingencies  of  the  insurrection.  He  is, 
therefore,  necessarily  thrown  upon  his  discre 
tion,  as  to  the  manner  in  which  he  will  use 
his  means  to  meet  the  varying  exigences  as 
they  arise.  If  the  insurgents  assail  the 
nation  with  an  army,  he  may  find  it  best  to 
meet  them  with  an  army,  and  suppress  the 
insurrection  in  the  field  of  battle.  If  they 
seek  to  prolong  the  rebellion  and  gather 
strength  by  intercourse  with  foreign  nations, 
he  may  choose  to  guard  the  coasts  and  close 
the  ports  with  a  navy,  as  one  of  the  most 
efficient  means  to  suppress  the  insurrection, 
and  if  they  employ  spies  and  emissaries  to 
gather  information,  to  forward  secret  sup 
plies,  and  to  excite  new  insurrections  in  aid 
of  the  original  rebellion,  he  may  find  it  both, 
prudent  and  humane  to  arrest  and  imprison 
them.  And  this  may  be  done  either  for  the 
purpose  of  bringing  them  to  trial  and  con 
dign  'punishment  for  their  crimes,  or  they 
may  be  held  in  custody  for  the  milder  end  of 
rendering  them  powerless  for  mischief  until 
the  exigency  is  past." 

Upon  this  same  subject — how  far  a  nation 
may  go  in  the  use  of  power,  and  the  means 
within  its  reach,  to  preserve  its  own  existence — 
Vattcl,  in  his  Law  of  Nations,  pp.  5  and  6, 
well  remarks: 

"  Since,  then,  a  nation  is  obliged  to  preserve 
itself,  it  has  a  right  to  every  thing  necessary 
for  its  preservation.  For  the  law  of  nations 
gives  us  a  right  to  every  thing,  without  which 
we  can  not  fulfill  our  obligation;  otherwise,  it 
would  oblige  us  to  do  impossibilities,  or  rather, 
would  contradict  itself  in  prescribing  us  a 
duty,  and  at  the  same  time,  debarring  us  of 
the  only  means  of  fulfilling  it.  *  *  *  * 
"  A  nation  or  State  has  a  right  to  every  thing  that 
can  help  to  ward  off  imminent  danger,  and  keep  at 
a  distance  whatever  is  capable  of  causing  its  ruin, 
and  that  from  the  very  same  reasons  that  establish 
its  right  to  the  things  necessary  to  its  preservation." 

Of  what  martial  law  is,  when  it  is  to  be 
called  into  existence,  and  to  whom  it  applies, 
Beuct,  in  his  Military  Law  and  Courts-Martial, 
page  14,  has  very  tersely  said: 

"Martial  law,  then,  is  that  military  rule  and 
authority  which  exists  in  time  of  war,  and  is 
conferred  by  the  laws  of  war,  in  relation  to 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


263 


person  and  things  under  and  within  the  scope 
of  active  military  operations  in  carrying  on 
the  war,  and  which  extinguishes  or  suspends 
civil  rights,  and  the  remedies  founded  upon 
them,  for  the  time  being,  so  far  as  it  may  ap 
pear  to  be  necessary  in  order  to  the  full  ac 
complishment  of  the  purpose  of  the  war,  the 
party  who  exercises  it  being  liable  in  an  ac 
tion  for  any  abuse  of  the  authority  thus  con 
ferred.  It  is  the  application  of  military 
government  —  the  government  of  force  —  to 
person  and  property  within  the  scope  of  it, 
according  to  the  laws  and  usages  of  war,  to 
the  exclusion  of  the  municipal  government, 
in  all  respects  where  the  latter  would  impair 
the  efficiency  of  military  law  or  military  ac 
tion."  See  also  North  American  Review,  Octo 
ber,  1861. 

And  again,  Halleck,  in  his  International 
Law  and  Laws  of  War,  page  380,  says  that 
this  right  to  declare,  apply  and  exercise  mar 
tial  law,  is  one  of  the  rights  of  sovereignty, 
and  is  as  essential  to  the  existence  of  a 
State  as  is  the  right  to  declare  and  carry  on 
war.  He  says: 

"We  remark,  in  conclusion,  that  the  right 
to  declare,  apply  and  exercise  martial  law,  is 
one  of  the  rights  of  sovereignty,  and  is  as  es 
sential  to  the  existence  of  a  State  as  is  the 
right  to  declare  or  carry  on  war.  It  is  one 
of  the  incidents  of  war;  and,  like  the  power 
to  take  human  life  in  battle,  results  directly 
and  immediately  from  the  fact  that  war  le 
gally  exists.  It  is  a  power  inherent  in  every 
government,  and  must  be  regarded  and  recog 
nized  by  all  other  governments;  but  the  ques 
tion  of  the  authority  of  any  particular  func 
tionary  to  exercise  this  power,  is  a  matter  to 
be  determined  by  local  and  not  by  interna 
tional  law.  Like  a  declaration  of  a  siege  or 
blockade,  the  power  of  the  officer  who  makes 
it  is  to  be  presumed  until  disavowed,  and  neu 
trals  who  attempt  to  act  in  derogation  of  that 
authority,  do  so  at  their  peril." 

^e  come  now  to  the  decisions  of  our  civil 
tribunals  touching  these  questions.  In  the 
case  of  Luther  vs.  Borden,  heretofore  referred 
to  in  the  discussion  of  these  principles,  Chief 
Justice  Taney,  in  delivering  the  opinion  of  the 
Court,  said: 

"It  was  so  understood  and  construed  by  the 
State  authorities,  and,  unquestionably,  a  State 
may  use  its  military  power  to  put  down  an 
armed  insurrection  too  strong  to  be  controlled 
by  the  civil  authority.  The  power  is  essential 
to  the  existence  of  ever}/  government,  essential  to  the 
preservation  of  order  and  free  institutions,  and  is  as 
necessary  to  the  States  of  this  Union  as  to  any  other 
government.  The  State  itself  must  determine 
what  degree  of  force  the  crisis  demands.  And 
if  the  government  of  Rhode  Island  deemed  the 
armed  opposition  so  formidable,  and  so  rami 
fied  throughout  the  State,  as  to  require  the  use 
of  its  military  force,  and  the  declaration  of 
martial  law,  we  see  no  ground  upon  which  this 
Court  can  question  its  authority.  It  was  a 
state  of  war;  and  the  established  government  re 
sorted  to  the  rights  and  usages  of  war  to  maintain 
itself,  and  to  overcome  the  unlawful  opposition. 
And  in  that  state  of  things,  the  officers  en 
gaged  in  its  military  service  might  lawfully 


arrest  any  one  who,  from  the  information  be 
fore  them,  they  had  reasonable  grounds  to  be 
lieve  was  engaged  in  the  insurrection,  and 
might  order  a  house  to  be  forcibly  entered  and 
searched,  when  there  were  reasonable  grounds 
for  supposing  he  might  be  there  concealed. 
Without  power  to  do  this,  martial  law  and  the  mil 
itary  array  of  the  government  would  be  mere  par 
ade,  and  rather  encourage  attack  than  repel  it.  No 
more  force,  however,  can  be  used  than  is  nec 
essary  to  accomplish  the  object.  And  if  the 
power  is  used  for  purposes  of  oppression,  or 
any  injury  willfully  done  to  person  or  prop 
erty,  the  party  by  whom,  or  by  whose  order,  it 
is  committed,  would  undoubtedly  be  answera 
ble." 

Here  we  have  the  entire  question  decided  by 
the  highest  tribunal  in  the  land,  as  to  the 
right  of  any  government  to  use  its  full  mili 
tary  power,  to  resort  to  the  rights  and  usages 
of  war  to  maintain  itself,  and  to  overcome  an 
unlawful  opposition;  or,  in  other  words,  to  put 
in  force  the  laws  of  war,  and  enforce  martial 
law. 

As  to  wherein  resides  the  authority  to  de 
clare  martial  law,  or  in  what  branch  of  the 
Government  it  resides,  this  Court  does  not  de 
cide:  it  does  however  recognize  martial  law, 
as  a  legitimate  means  of  preserving  the  Gov 
ernment  in  great  emergencies. 

In  the  same  case,  Justice  Woodbury  dissent 
ing,  invieghing  at  great  length  against  the 
existence  of  martial  law,  under  any  contin-. 
gency  under  our  Constitution,  finally  sums  up 
the  whole  matter  by  the  following  admission: 
"The  necessities  of  foreign  war,  it  is  conceded, 
sometimes  impart  great  powers  as  to  both 
things  and  persons,  but  they  are  modified  by 
these  necessities  and  subjected  to  numerous 
regulations  of  national  law,  justice  and  hu 
manity.  These,  when  they  exist  in  modern 
times,  while  laying  the  persons  who  conduct 
war  under  some  necessary  authority  of  an 
extraordinary  character,  must  limit,  control 
and  make  its  exercise  under  certain  circum 
stances,  and  in  a  certain  manner,  justifiable  or 
void,  with  almost  as  much  certainty  and  clear 
ness  as  in  provisions  concerning  municipal 
authority  or  duty.  So  may  it  be  in  some  ex 
treme  stages  on  civil  war.  Among  these  my 
impression  is  that  a  state  of  war,  whether  for 
eign  or  domestic,  may  exist,  in  the  great  perils 
of  which  it  is  competent,  under  its  rights  and 
on  principles  of  national  law,  for  a  command 
ing  officer  of  troops,  under  the  control  of  the 
Government,  to  extend  certain  rights  of  war, 
not  only  over  his  camp  but  its  environs,  and 
the  near  field  of  his  military  operations." 
tith  American  Archives,  180.  Johnson  vs.  Davis 
et  al.,  3  Marslon,  535-51. 

On  this  rested  the  justification  of  one  of  the 
great  commanders  of  this  war  and  the  age,  in 
a  transaction  so  well  known  at  New  Orleans. 

"But  in  civil  strife,  they  are  not  to  extend 
beyond  the  places  where  insurrection  exists. ' 
3  Marston,  551.  "Nor  to  portions  of  the  State 
remote  from  the  scene  of  military  operations, 
nor  after  the  resistance  is  over,  nor  to  persons 
not  connected  with  it,  nor  even  within  the 
scene  can  they  extend  to  the  person  or  prop 
erty  of  citizens  against  whom  no  probable 


264 


TREASON    TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


cause  exists  which  may  justify  it."  Sutton  vs.  militia  and  use  the  military  and  naval  forces 
Johnson,  1  D.  $  £.,  549.  "Nor  to  the  property  I  of  the  United  States;  in  case  of  invasion  by 
of  any  person  without  necessity  or  civil  pre- !  a  foreign  nation,  the  President  is  not  only  au- 
cept."  jthorized,  but  bound  to  resist  force  by  force. 

Here  Justice  Woodbury  himself  admits  that,  |  He  docs  not  initiate  a  war,  but  is  bound  to  ac- 
in  certain  contingencies,  extraordinary  pow- |  cept  the  challenge,  without  waiting  for  any 
ers  may  be  exercised  under  the  aegis  of  mar-  special  legislative  authority.  And  whether 
tial  law,  limited  only  by  time,  place  and  cir-  the  hostile  party  be  a  foreign  invader,  or 
cumstances.  He  calls  them  the  "rights  of  |  States  organized  in  rebellion,  it.  is  none  the  less 
war."  I  have  named  the  same  thing,  and  the  j  a  war,  although  the  declaration  of  it  be  uni- 
law  generally  names  it  the  "laws  of  war:'  '  lateral.  Lord  Stowell  (1st  Dodson,  247)  ob- 
He  says,  "they"  [the  rights  of  war]  [the  laws  serves  that  it  is  none  the  less  a  war  on  that 
of  warj  "are  not  to  extend  beyond  the  places  account,  for  war  may  exist  without  a  declara- 
where  insurrection  exists,  nor  to  the  portions  tion  on  either  side." 
of  the  State  remote  from  the  scene  of  military  1  Thus  we  see  that  under  the  Constitution,  it 


operations,  nor  after  the  resistance  is  over, 
nor  to  persons  not  connected  with  it,  nor  to 
persons  against  whom  no  probable  cause  ex 
ists."  Of  course,  then,  with  these  limitations, 
an  arrest  may  be  made  legally  and  constitu 
tionally  under  the  exigences  contemplated. 
The  argument  to  which  we  have  listened  on 


is  the  duty  of  the  President  to  move  forward, 
to  enter  upon  the  highway  toward  the  sup 
pression  of  a  rebellion  or  insurrection,  or  to 
meet  an  invading  foe,  without  any  action  of 
Congress,  and  without  any  declaration  of 
war;  and  the  route  that  he  shall  take,  the 
means  that  he  shall  use  to  meet  and  suppress 


the  great  danger  of  too  much  power  being  ex- 'that  rebellion,  or  insurrection,  are  solely  in 
ercised  by  the  President,  or  the  danger  of  this   '  ' 
power  being  exercised   by  him,  is   very  ably 
replied  to  by  Chief  Justice  Taney,  on  page  44 
of  1th  Howard. 

"It  is  said  that  this  power  of  the  President 
is  dangerous  to  liberty,  and  may  be  abused. 
All  power  may  be  abused  if  placed  in  un 
worthy  hands.  But  it  would  be  difficult,  we 
think,  to  point  out  any  other  hands  in  which 
this  power  would  be  more  safe,  and,  at  the 
same  time,  equally  effectual.  When  citizens 
of  the  same  State  are  in  arms  against  each 
other,  and  the  constituted  authorities  unable 
to  execute  the  laws,  the  interposition  must  be 
prompt  or  it  is  of  little  value.  The  ordinary 
course  of  proceedings  in  courts  of  justice 
would  be  utterly  unfit  for  the  crisis.  And 
the  elevated  office  of  the  President,  chosen  as 
he  is  by  the  people  of  the  United  States,  and 
the  high  responsibility  he  could  not  fail  to  feel 
when  acting  in  a  case  of  so  much  moment,  ap 
pear  to  furnish  as  strong  safeguards  against 
willful  abuse  of  power  as  human  prudence  and 
foresight  could  well  provide.  At  all  events, 
it  is  conferred  upon  him  by  the  Constitution 
and  laws  of  the  United  States,  and  must, 
therefore,  be  respected  and  enforced  in  its  ju 
dicial  tribunals." 

In  a  series  of  Prize  cases  decided  by  the 
Supreme  Court,  March  10th,  1863,  the  opin 
ion  of  the  Court  was  delivered  by  Mr.  Justice 
Grier.  Of  the  war  powers  of  the  President 
during  this  rebellion,  he  says:  "By  the  Con 
stitution,  Congress  alone  has  power  to  declare 
national  or  foreign  war.  It  can  not  declare 
war  against  a  State,  or  any  number  of  States, 
by  virtue  of  any  clause  in  the  Constitution. 
It  confers  on  the  President  the  whole  execu 
tive  power;  he  is  bound  to  take  care  that  the 
laws  be  faithfully  executed.  He  is  Com- 
mander-in-Chief  of  the  army  and  navy  of 
the  United  States,  and  of  the  militia  of  the 
several  States  when  called  into  the  active  ser 
vice  of  the  United  States.  He  has  no  power 
to  initiate  or  declare  war,  either  against  a 


his  own  discretion. 

Again,  Justice  Grier  says,  in  the  same  opin 
ion:  "Whether  the  President  in  fulfilling  his 
duties  as  Commander-in-Chief,  in  suppressing 
an  insurrection,  has  met  with  such  armed 
hostile  resistance,  and  with  civil  war  of  such 
alarming  proportions  as  will  compel  him  to 
accord  to  them  a  character  of  belligerents,  is 
a  question  to  be  decided  by  him;  and  this 
Court  must  be  governed  by  the  decision  and 
acts  of  the  political  department  of  the  Gov 
ernment  to  which  this  power  is  intrusted,  It 
must  determine  what  degree  of  power  the  crisis  de 
mands.  The  proclamation  of  the  blockade  is 
itself  official  and  conclusive  evidence  to  the 
Court  that  a  .state  of  war  existed  which  de 
manded  and  authorized  a  recourse  to  such  a 
measure."  Thus  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States,  in  the  last  cases  brought  before 
it  in  which  this  question  was  at  all  discussed, 
on  March  10th,  1863,  expressly  decided  that 
with  the  President  rests  the  determination,  of 
the  degree  of  power  which  the  crisis  demands 
shall  be  exercised,  and  with  that  determina 
tion  the  Court  can  not  interfere.  The  Presi 
dent  has  determined  that  the  degree  of  power 
necessary  to  suppress  this  rebellion  is,  to 
hold  this  class  of  offenders  amenable  to  mar 
tial  law,  and  to  trial  by  military  courts;  and 
his  decision  in  this  matter  is  final.  Upon 
this  same  question,  I  find  the  following: 
"Moreover,  when  a  military  force  is  called 
out  to  repel  invasion  or  suppress  a  rebellion, 
it-is  not  placed  under  the  direction  of  the  ju 
diciary,  but  under  that  of  the  executive.  Sup 
pose  the  military  force,  legally  and  constitu 
tionally  called  into  service  for  the  purposes 
indicated,  should  find  it  necessary,  in  the 
course  of  its  military  operations,  to  occupy  a 
field  or  garden,  or  destroy  trees,  or  houses, 
belonging  to  some  private  person,  can  a  court, 
by  injunction,  restrain  them  from  committing 
such  waste?  It  can  do  so  in  time  of  peace, 
and  if  its  powers  are  to  continue  in  time  of 

.„   „.    , ..fc. „„   „ ,  war,    the   judiciary,    and    not    the   executive, 

foreign  nation  or  a  domestic  State;  but  by  the  will  command  the  army  and  navy.  The  tak- 
act  of  Congress  of  February  28th,  1795,  and  ing  or  destroying  of  private  property  in  such 
March  3,  1861,  he  is  authorized  to  call  out  the  cases,  is  a  military  act,  an  act  of  war,  and 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


265 


must  be  governed  by  the  laws  of  war;  it  is 
not  provided  for  by  the  laws  of  peace.  In  the 
same  way,  a  person  taken  and  held  by  the 
military  forces,  whether  before,  or  in,  or  after 
a  battle,  or  without  any  battle  at  all,  is  virtu 
ally  a  prisoner  of  war.  No  matter  what  his  al 
leged  offense,  whether  he  is  a  rebel,  a  traitor, 
a  spy,  or  an  enemy  in  arms,  he  is  to  be  held 
and  punished  according  to  the  laws  of  war, 
for  these  have  been  substituted  for  the  laws 
of  peace.  And  fora  person  so  taken  and  held  by 
the  military  authority,  a  writ  of  habeas  corpus 
can  have  no  effect,  because,  in  the  words  of 
the  United  States  Supreme  Court,  'the  ordin 
ary  course  of  justice  would  be  utterly  unfit 
for  such  a  crisis.'"  International  and  Laws  of 
War,  Hallcck,  p.  378. 

Finally,  upon  this  question,  the  counsel  for 
the  accused,  in  their  argument  against  the 
jurisdiction  of  this  Court,  rely  mainly  upon 
the  amendments  to  the  Constitution,  articles 
6  and  6,  which  read  as  follows : 

"Art.  5.  No  person  shall  be  held  to  answer  for 
a  capital  or  otherwise  infamous  crime,  unless 
on  a  presentment  or  indict  merit  by  a  grand  jury, 
except  in  cases  arising  in  the  land  or  naval 
forces,  or  in  the  militia  when  in  actual  ser 
vice  in  time  of  war,  or  public  danger;  nor 
shall  any  person  be  subject  for  the  same  of 
fense  to  be  twice  put  in  jeopardy  of  life  or 
limb;  nor  shall  be  compelled  in  any  criminal 
case  to  be  a  witness  against  himself,  nor  be 
deprived  of  life,  liberty,  or  property,  without 
due  process  of  law;  nor  shall' private  prop 
erty  be  taken  for  public  use,  without  just 
compensation. 

"Art.  6.  In  all  criminal  prosecutions,  the 
accused  shall  enjoy  the  right  to  a  speedy  and 
public  trial,  by  an  impartial  jury  of  the  State 
nnd  district  wherein  the  crime  shall  have  been 
committed,  which  district  shall  have  been  pre 
viously  ascertained  by  law,  and  to  be  in 
formed  of  the  nature  and  cause  of  the  accusa 
tion;  to  be  confronted  with  the  witnesses 
against  him;  to  have  compulsory  process  for 
obtaining  witnesses  in  his  favor;  and  to  have 
the  assistance  of  counsel  for  his  defense." 

Although  a  strict  construction  of  these  ar 
ticles  would  seem  to  give  force  to  such  a  con 
clusion,  yet  in  construing  the  different  parts 
of  the  Constitution,  such  a  literal  interpreta 
tion  of  the  amendments  must  be  allowed  to 
give  way  before  the  necessity  of  an  efficient 
exercise  of  the  war  power  which  is  vested  in 
Congress  by  that  instrument,  and  the  war 
powers  conveyed  to  the  President  when  he  is 
designated  as  Commander-in-Chief  of  the 
armies.  This  more  liberal  construction  of  the 
Constitution  has,  from  a  very  early  period  of 
our  history,  been  recognized  by  the  legislature 
of  the  country. 

By  turning  to  the  56th  and  57th  Articles  of 
War,  it  will  be  seen — if  those  articles  have 
any  force,  and,  so  far  as  my  knowledge  ex 
tends,  their  full  power  and  force  have  never 
been  questioned  —  these  amendments  to  the 
Constitution  do  not  apply  to  "all  persons," 
nor  to  "all  citizens"  of  the  United  States:  nor 
fire  they  applicable  to  all  circumstances  and 
emergencies.  Those  Articles  of  War  read  as 
follows: 


j  "Art.  50.  Whosoever  shall  relieve  the  ene- 
I  my  with  money,  victuals,  or  ammunition,  or 
shall  knowingly  harbor  or  protect  an  enemy, 
shall  suffer  death,  or  such  crther  punishment 
as  shall  be  ordered  by  the  sentence  of  a  court- 
martial. 

"Art.  57.  Whosoever  shall  be  convicted  of 
holding  correspondence  with,  or  giving  in 
telligence  to,  the  enemy,  either  directly  or  in 
directly,  shall  suffer  death,  or  such  other  pun 
ishment  as  shall  be  ordered  by  the  sentence  of 
a  court-martial." 

Those  articles  conferring  this  jurisdiction, 
were  adopted  by  the  original  Congress  of  the 
Confederation;  and  their  terms  and  effect  re 
mained  unchanged  at  the  time  of  the  forma 
tion  of  the  Constitution.  In  1806  a  slight 
modification  in  their  language  was  introduced ; 
the  substitution  of  "whosoever"  for  "all  per 
sons;"  and  thus  a  Congress  composed  of  many 
of  the  original  founders  of  the  Republic,  sub 
stantially  reaffirmed  the  jurisdiction  of  mil 
itary  courts  as  to  this  class  of  offenders.  This 
fact,  that  no  alteration  has  been  made  in  them 
by  any  subsequent  Congress,  either  in  time  of 
peace,  or  during  any  war  in  which  the  coun 
try  has  been  engaged,  may  be  regarded  as  an 
unmistakable  indication  that  the  amendments 
to  the  Constitution  conferring  the  right  of 
trial  by  jury,  etc.,  must  yield,  in  a  time  like 
the  present,  to  such  a  vigorous  exercise  of  the 
war  power  as  may  be  essential  to  the  preserv 
ation  of  the  Government. 

Upon  the  necessity  of  the  declaration  and 
enforcement  of  martial  law  in  the  present 
cases,  I  have  but  a  word  to  say.  I  believe  with 
the  Supreme  Court,  that  this  is  a  matter  en 
tirely  within  the  discretion  of  the  comrnander- 
in-chief  of  the  armies;  that  that  political  de 
partment  of  the  Government,  to  which  it  prop 
erly  belongs,  must  wield  the  necessary  force 
to  suppress  this  rebellion;  what  that  necessary 
force  is,  he  alone  can  determine.  I  may  be 
permitted  to  add,  however,  that  in  my  judg 
ment,  and,  I  believe  in  the  judgment  of  every 
man  who  has  carefully  and  calmly  considered 
the  state  of  the  country,  and  the  circumstan 
ces  of  the  times  when  these  arrests  were  made, 
it  was  necessary  that  these  parties  should  be 
held  amenable  to  martial  law,  and  to  trial  by 
a  military  tribunal.  It  has  been  admitted  by 
the  counsel  for  the  accused,  (Mr.  Gordon,)  that 
if  martial  law  does  exist  here,  then  these  par 
ties  may  possibly  be  triable  by  a  military  tri 
bunal;  without  that  preceding  fact,  he  says 
they  can  not  be.  In  other  parts  of  his  argu 
ment,  he  claims  that  even  did  the  exigences 
of  the  time  require  the  arrest  of  these  parties, 
and  the  enforcement  of  martial  law,  after  their 
arrest  they  should  have  been  turned  over  to 
the  civil  authorities  for  trial.  To  that  I  an 
swer:  all  laws — whether  they  be  civil,  mari 
time,  or  military — have  legitimate  tribunals 
for  their  administration;  the  common  law,  by 
the  common  law  courts;  maritime  law,  by 
maritime  courts;  and  the  military  law,  by 
courts-martial.  Martial  law  is  as  clear  and 
well  defined  as  any  other  law;  and  it  is  but 
proper  that  it  should  have  a  tribunal  by  which 
it  shall  be  administered;  the  tribunal  in  this 
case  is  a  Military  Commission.  It  is  better, 


266 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


and  more  in  accordance  with  the  progress  and 
tendencies  of  the  age,  that  this  law  should  be 
administered  by  a  court  governed  by  all  the 
checks  and  balances  of  ordinary  courts  of  jus 
tice,  than  by  a  military  commander,  as  in 
former  times. 

In  this  case,  the  accused  have  had  the  bene 
fit  of  an  open  trial,  conducted  according  to 
all  the  known  rules  of  the  common  law.  A 
majority  of  the  Court  is  composed  of  men  who 
have  achieved  wide  reputation  in  the  State  as 
lawyers.  There  is  no  right  granted  to  an  ac 
cused  in  any  civil  court  in  the  land,  that  has 
not  been  freely  and  fully  given  in  the  pro 
gress  of  this  trial.  The  questions  have  been 
asked  and  answered  orally;  all  objections 
have  been  discussed  in  open  court,  and  the 
accused  have  had  the  advantage  of  having 
every  word  uttered  by  the  witnesses  or  by  the 
counsel  in  discussion,  accurately  recorded, 
and  to  that  record  they  have  had  full  and  free 
access  to  see  that  it  contains  no  error  or  omis 
sion  that  might,  in  the  slightest  degree,  prej 
udice  their  cause.  Wherein,  then,  regarding 
it  as  a  matter  of  justice  and  right,  are  these 
accused  wronged  by  this  proceeding?  They 
do  not  complain  of  the  persons  who  compose 
this  Court;  they  themselves  have  passed  eulo 
gies  upon  their  high  and  honorable  character; 
they  have  made  no  complaint  of  the  mode  of 
conducting  this  case;  they  admit  that  they 
hav-e  received  every  courtesy  and  every  right 
they  could  justly  claim  at  the  hands  of  the 
Government;  wherein,  then,  I  ask  again,  is  the 
injustice  of  trying  these  accused  by  this  Court, 
according  to  all  the  known  rules  and  princi 
ples  of  the  common  law? 

In  considering  the  question  of  the  necessity 
of  martial  law  obtaining  to  the  extent  of  try 
ing  this  peculiar  class  of  offenders  by  a  mili 
tary  tribunal,  we  must  examine  the  circum 
stances  as  they  appeared  to  the  authority  who 
ordered  these  arrests,  and  sent  these  cases  be 
fore  this  Court  for  trial.  Upon  this  question, 
Chief  Justice  Taney,  in  Mitchell  vs.  Harmony, 
13th  Howard,  page  134,  says: 

"It  is  the  emergency  that  gives  the  right, 
and  the  emergency  must  be  shown  to  exist  be 
fore  the  taking  can  be  justified.  In  deciding 
upon  this  necessity,  however,  the  state  of  the  facts, 
as  they  appeared  to  the  officer,  at  the  time  he  acted, 
must  govern  the  decision ;  for  he  must  necessarily 
act  upon  the  information  of  others,  as  well  as  his 
own  observation" 

In  answer  to  a  question  of  the  accused, 
through  their  counsel,  Mr.  Coffroth,  Major 
General  Hovey,  in  speaking  of  his  action  in 
making  these  arrests,  very  pertinently  says: 

"It  was  based  upon  my  general  knowledge 
of  affairs  in  Indiana,  the  condition  of  the 
country,  and  Mr.  Milligan's  action  in  regard 
to  it,  together  with  the  dangers  that  surround 
ed  us  at  that  time."  The  counsel  asked  him  : 
"  To  what  action  do  you  refer  ?"  The  General 
answered:  "To  the  conspiracy  against  the 
authority  of  the  United  States."  "What  par 
ticular  actions  of  Mr.  Milligan,  in  the  mat 
ter?"  He  answers:  "Mr.  Milligan,  I  under 
stood,  from  reliable  authority,  was  a  major 
general  of  the  organization,  and  had  taken 
Steps  to  aid  it  and  carry  on  revolution."  And 


this  answer,  the  General  says,  applies  to  all 
the  accused.  Here,  then,  are  the  circumstances 
under  which  the  Commanding  General  of  this 
District  acted  in  arresting  these  parties,  and 
sending  them  before  this  military  tribunal  for 
trial ;  these  are  the  circumstances,  as  they 
appeared  to  him;  and  he  would  certainly  have 
failed  in  doing  his  duty,  had  he  acted  other 
wise.  I  submit  that  the  facts,  as  developed 
before  this  Court,  entirely  sustain  the  opinion 
formed  by  General  Hovey,  as  to  the  necessity 
for  making  these  arrests,  and  the  necessity  for 
trial  before  this  Commission.  It  has  been 
proved  beyond  question,  that  a  conspiracy, 
more  extensive,  more  perfect  in  its  organiza 
tion,  and  more  damnable  in  its  designs,  never 
was  concocted  or  brought  into  existence  under 
any  government  since  governments  were  first 
instituted.  It  has  been  proved  that  these  par 
ties  now  on  trial,  were  members  of  that  con 
spiracy;  all,  excepting  one,  holding  military 
positions  in  this  organization;  that  this  con 
spiracy  existed  in  almost  every  town  and 
county  of  the  State;  and  not  only  in  this 
State,  but  in  the  States  of  Missouri,  Kentucky, 
Illinois  and  Ohio;  that  it  was  thoroughly 
organized,  and  partially  armed;  that  all  the 
objects  contemplated  by  the  order,  were'  ille 
gal,  treasonable  and  damnable;  and  that  its 
lurking  venom  permeated  all  grades  of  society. 
Under  such  circumstances,  would  the  Govern 
ment  have  been  safe  in  issuing  a  venire  for  a 
grand  or  petit  jury  to  investigate  and  try 
these  cases?  Could  you  have  kept  from  either 
of  these  juries  a  sufficient,  number  of  this  same 
organization  to  have  defeated  the  whole  ends 
of  justice?  I  state  what  is  well  known  to  ev 
ery  lawyer  in  the  land,  that  no  jury  could 
possibly  have  been  convened  in  this  State,  by 
the  ordinary  process  of  impanneling  a  jury, 
that  would  not  have  contained  at  least  one 
member  of  this  organization;  and  that  one 
member  would  have  been  sufficient  to  acquit 
any  criminal  tried  before  them.  In  a  land 
where  a  conspiracy  has  so  contaminated  all 
classes  of  society,  the  ordinary  avenues  of 
justice  are  obstructed,  and  the  Government, 
under  such  circumstances,  by  the  ordinary 
channels,  is  powerless  to  punish  or  to  save. 

I  submit,  with  all  due  deference  to  the  opin 
ion  of  the  eminent  counsel  on  behalf  of  the 
accused,  that  at  the  time  these  arrests  were 
made,  this  conspiracy,  this  intended  insurrec 
tion  had  not  been  abandoned.  As  the  evidence  in 
this  case,  and  subsequent  events,  have  most 
clearly  shown,  the  Order  of  American  Knights, 
or  of  the  "Sons  of  Liberty,"  was  never  more 
flourishing,  more  determined,  and  more  ven 
omous  than  at  that  very  time. 

And  had  the  leaders  of  this  conspiracy,  these 
military  chieftains,  been  arrested,  brought  be 
fore  a  civil  tribunal,  and  released  upon  bail, 
would  that  have  been  a  sure  way  of  prevent 
ing  the  consummation  of  this  conspiracy? 
Would  it  not  rather  have  hastened  the  catas 
trophe  you  are  trying  to  ward  off,  and  simply 
give  them  to  understand  that  the  Government 
had  some  knowledge  of  their  criminal  intents? 
I  submit,  then,  that  the  danger  was  imminent; 
requiring  prompt  action,  rind  a  strong  and 
vigorous  arm;  that  there  was  an  overpowering 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


267 


necessity  for  military  interference  on  the  part 
of  the  Government;  and  the  loyal  people  of 
this  nation  would,  with  one  voice,  have  cried: 
"Shame,  shame,"  if  those  who  had  the  power 
failed  to  meet  the  emergency.  For  this  proc 
lamation  of  martial  law,  and  for  this  kind  of 
arrests,  the  President  of  the  United  States  has 
been  tried  by  the  highest  court  short  of  the 
court  of  Heaven;  he  has  been  tried  upon  this 
very  issue  by  a  tribunal  composed  of  twenty- 
five  millions  of  freemen,  and  the  verdict,  in 
stead  of  being  condemnation,  has  been :  "  Well 
done,  good  and  faithful  servant!"  Public 
opinion,  that  power  which  Talleyrand  declared 
to  Napoleon  was  more  omnipotent  than  he  and 
all  his  armies,  has  indorsed  the  necessity  for 
these  arrests,  and  the  trial  of  these  parties  be 
fore  courts  that  can  act  with  a  rapidity  and 
vigor  unknown  to  civil  tribunals.  That  pow 
er,  public  opinion,  is  the  court  of  last  resort. 
Its  voice  is  like  the  resistless  sweep  of  the  arm 
of  Jehovah;  before  which  all  powers,  govern 
ments,  statesmanship,  and  judicial  tribunals 
must  yield  and  change,  as  it,  in  its  omnipo 
tence,  shall  direct. 

CONSPIRACY   PER   SE. 

We  come  now  to  the  consideration  of 
whether  the  Order  of  American  Knights,  or 
Order  of  Sons  of  Liberty,  was  a  conspiracy 
per  se.  And  first,  we  shall  direct  attention, 
briefly,  to  the  argument  of  Mr.  Coffroth,  coun 
sel  for  Mr.  Milligan,  on  this  point.  And  in 
doing  so,  I  deem  it  my  duty  to  say  that  it  is 
one  of  the  most  singular  arguments  I  have 
ever  met  with,  or  have  ever  known  to  be  made 
in  the  trial  of  any  cause.  Its  tone  is  disre 
spectful,  to  say  the  least,  to  this  tribunal,  and 
insulting  to  the  American  people,  and  its 
statements  are  frequently  at  variance  with 
the  proofs.  Were  it  not  that  I  see  Mr.  Cof- 
froth's  name  signed  to  this  argument,  and  that 
I  heard  him  read  it  as  his  own  production,  I 
would  have  been  strong  in  the  belief  that  it 
emanated  from  the  bitter  and  disloyal  heart 
of  the  accused,  L.  P.  Milligan,  himself. 

The  counsel  starts  off  with  the  assertion 
that  this  is  "more  of  a  political  than  a  crimi 
nal  prosecution;"  and  he  says  to  this  Court, 
"you  are  sitting  in  judgment  upon  political 
opponents,  for  alleged  political  offenses."  The 
first  assertion  is  untrue,  if  he  means  by  the 
use  of  the  word  "political"  to  class  the  ac 
cused  simply  as  Democrats,  because  the  ma 
jority  of  this  Court  will  tell  you  that  they 
have  never  been  any  thing  else.  If  he  means 
by  this  political  division,  to  class  the  accused 
as  against  the  Government — opposed  to  its 
institution,  and  the  Court  in  favor  of  them — 
then  they  are  political  opponents.  This  is  no 
political  prosecution.  I  drew  up  the  charges 
against  these  men,  and  signed  my  name  to 
them,  simply  because  I  had  reason  to  believe 
they  were  criminals;  I  knew  nothing  of  their 
politics,  or  of  their  political  standing;  no  one 
informed  me,  before  these  charges  were  pre 
ferred,  what  their  political  standing  was  ;  I 
desired  no  such  information ;  I  desired  sim 
ply  to  bring  to  justice  men  who  were  trying 
to  aid  traitors  in  arms  against  this  Govern 
ment.  I  next  come  to  the  assertion,  "  During 


the  whole  progress  of  this  trial,  partisan 
hate,  with  blind  and  fiendish  malignity,  has 
been  demanding  blood."  I  can  not,  of  course, 
say  what  the  gentleman  may  have  heard,  or 
determine  the  source  of  his  information,  but 
I  have  heard  of  no  partisan  demand  for 
blood ;  I  have  seen  no  blind  or  fiendish  ma 
lignity  exhibited  on  the  part  of  any  citizens 
of  this  Republic  toward  the  accused.  It  is 
true  that  when  the  claims  of  these  traitors, 
these  conspirators,  were  'made  known  to  the 
people  of  the  land,  those  who  were  resting  in 
the  peaceful  security  of  their  homes,  started 
back  appalled  at  the  gulf  which  was  opened 
to  their  vision,  at  their  very  feet.  The  cold 
blooded  villainy  of  the  scheme  that  these  men 
deliberately  discussed  in  their  councils,  and 
proceeded,  with  premeditation  and  delibera 
tion,  to  execute,  appalled  and  shocked  the 
moral  sense  not  only  of  this  entire  nation, 
but  of  the  whole  civilized  world. 

Upon  what  a  conspiracy  per  se  is,  there  can 
be  no  difference  of  opinion ;  it  is  a  corrupt 
agreeing  together  by  two  or  more  persons,  to 
do  some  unlawful  thing,  either  as  a  means  or 
an  end ;  or,  in  other  words,  to  do  some  legal 
thing  in  an  illegal  manner,  or  directly  to 
commit  an  illegal  act  by  combination  or 
agreement. 

We  come  next  to  the  parts  of  this  order  set 
out  by  the  gentleman  in  his  argument;  and 
the  whole  matter  can  be  set  at  rest  by  saying 
that  all  those  parts  of  the  ritual  given  by  the 
gentleman,  are  taken  from  the  Vestibule  de 
gree.  I  speak  now  of  the  declaration  of 
principles.  The  gentleman  did  not  go  even  to 
the  first  degree  of  the  order.  If  he  had  looked 
a  little  further,  he  would  have  found  that  the 
principles  enunciated  in  the  first  degree  of 
this  Order  of  American  Knights,  or  Order  of 
Sons  of  Liberty,  are  not  "the  very  principles 
upon  which  our  Government  was  adminis 
tered  in  the  better  days  of  the  Republic."  To 
understand  clearly  the  ends  aimed  at  by  this 
organization,  and  whether  those  ends  were  le 
gal  or  illegal,  we  must  place  ourselves  as 
nearly  as  possible  at  the  stand-point  of  the 
organization;  we  must  consider  the  opinions 
and  principles  of  Government  held  by  its 
members;  we  must  consider  the  circumstances 
of  the  nation — as  this  Court  has  a  right  judi 
cially  to  do,  without  proof — and  the  attitude 
of  these  members  of  the  order  toward  that  na 
tion,  during  this  great  crisis. 

We  find  the  Government  engaged  in  a  strug 
gle  for  its  very  existence;  calling  into  requi 
sition  all  the  power  and  force  she  can  com 
mand.  She  is  contending  with  an  enemy  so 
great  in  numbers,  and  so  powerful,  that  as  yet, 
after  nearly  four  years'  struggle,  exerting  her 
itmost  strength,  she  has  been  unable  to  over 
come  it.  And  where  did  the  men  composing 
this  organization  stand,  upon  the  vital  ques- 
ion  of  the  maintainance  of  the  national  in 
tegrity  ?  I  ask  the  Court,  does  the  proof  show 
that  they  were  standing  by  the  Government, 
aiding  itcheerfully  withtheirmeans,  with  their 
sympathy,  and  with  cheir  strength?  Or  does  the 
proof  show,  on  the  contrary,  that  they  were  op 
posed  to  this  war  waged  for  the  life  of  the  nation ; 
that  they  were  engaged  in  disseminating  tho 


288 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


doctrine  that  such  a  war  was  unconstitutional 
and  unauthorized,  and  giving  encouragement 
and  sympathy  to  the  enemies  of  the  Govern 
ment?  This  war  was.  begun  by  those  now  in 
arms  against  the  Government,  to  maintain  the 
doctrine  that  a  State  had  the  right,  at  will,  to 
secede,  and  join  its  fortune  to  a  separate  na 
tionality;  or,  in  other  words,  that  this  Gov- 


It  will  be  remembered  by  the  Court  that  of 
all  the  witnesses  who  have  spoken  upon  this 
point,  and  who  have  undertaken  to  explain  for 
the  accused  their  principles,  and  their  under 
standing  of  the  intent  and  purposes  of  this 
organization,  there  has  not  been  one  but  has 
claimed  that  the  Government  was  exercising 
usurped  powers,  powers  not  delegated. 


ernment  of  ours  is  but  a  combination  of  sep-       The  witness  Corlew,  one  of  Mr.  Milligan's 


sovereignties,   exercising    the    special 
powers   delegated    by  .those    separate    sover- 


witnesses  as  to  character,  and,  like  nearly  all 
the  rest,  a  member  of  the  order,  when  the  di- 


eignties,  and  that  at  will  that  compact  could  rect  question  was  put  to  him,  whether  he  con- 
be  dissolved.  This,  I  believe,  is  a  fair  state-  sidered  the  Government  a  usurpation,  de 
ment  of  the  origin  of  the  contest  going  on  in  clared  that  he  did;  and  it  was  only  after  bein 
this  nation  to-day — what  the  reasons  were  of  j  "doctored"  from  the  evening  of  one  day  to 
those  in  arms  against  the  Government  for  de-  the  morning  of  the  next,  by  the  astute  coun- 
siring  a  separate  nationality,  I  do  not  stop  to  sel  of  Mr.  Milligan,  that  he  was  brought  up 
inquire  or  discuss.  These,  then,  are  the  prin-  j  to  the  point  of  explaining  that  he  did  not 
ciples  that  our  enemies  are  attempting  to 
maintain  by  force  of  arms. 


We  have  charged  in  the  pleadings  in  this 
case,  in  the  first  place,  "Conspiracy  against 
the  Government  of  the  United  States;"  and 
under  that  charge,  have  set  out  in  Specifica 
tion  1st,  that  the  accused  did  join  themselves 


mean  to  claim  that  the  Government  was  a 
usurpation,  but  only  that  there  were  cer 
tain  usurpations  on  the  part  of  the  Adminis 
tration;  or,  in  other  words,  that  the  Adminis 
tration  was  exercising  undelegated  powers. 
The  witness  Bird,  a  member  of  the  Legisla 
ture,  and  a  member  of  this  order;  Judge  Lough- 


tf o- ^  — 

to  this  secret  order  "for  the   purpose  of  over-   ridge,  also  a  member  of  the  order,  and  Bur- 
throwing   the   Government  and   duly   consti 


tuted  authorities  of  the  United  States  ;  "  and 
under  the  Second  Specification  of  that  charge, 
that  they  did  combine  with  certain  parties 
•'  to  adopt  and  impart  to  others  the  creed  or  rit 
ual  of  a  secret,  unlawful  society,  or  order;" 
"denying  the  authority  of  the  United  States 
to  coerce  to  submission  certain  rebellious 
citizens  of  said  United  States."  Specification 
3d  charges  that  they  did  conspire  with  certain 
parties  "to  overthrow  and  render  powerless 
the  Government  of  the  United  States"  In 
forming  and  organizing  this  unlawful  soci- 


ton,  a  witness  for  Humphreys,  also  a  member 
of  the  order,  all  claimed  that  the  Government 
was  exercising  powers  not  delegated.  Having 
ascertained  from  the  witnesses  for  the  defense 
their  opinion  of  the  acts  of  the  Government, 
and  whether  they  sympathize  with  her,  or 
with  her  enemies,  and  having  found  that  they 
believe  that  the  Government  is  exercising  nn- 
delegated  power,  we  refer  to  the  ritual  of  the 
order  to  which  they  have  attached  themselves 
by  binding  oaths — under  the  penalty  of 
death  if  violated — to  ascertain  how  they  look 
upon  the  Government  when  she  is  exercising 


ety  or  order;    and  that  they  did    assist,   in  ex-  undelegated  powers.     I  refer  you  again  to  Ar- 

tending  this  order  whose  purpose  was  to  crip-  tide  7.     "Hence,  if  those  who  shall  have  been 

pie  and    render  powerless   the  efforts  of  the  chosen  to  administer  that  Government,  shall 

Government  in    suppressing  a  then   existing  assume   (and   they  say  under  oath   that   they 


and  formidable  rebellion.  Specification  4th 
sets  out  the  manner  by  which  they  were  to 
carry  into  execution  these  unlawful  schemes. 
Now,  let  us  see  whether,  prima  Jacic,  there  is 
any  thing  in  the  principles  enunciated  by  this 
order,  that  would  support  these  charges  and 
specifications,  outside  and  entirely  separate 
from  any  proof  in  this  case. 

The  Court  will  bear  in  mind  our  statement 
of  the  issue  upon  which  the  war  is  being 
waged  in  this  country  to-day.  I  refer  them 
now  to  Article  6,  in  the  lesson  of  the  First  De 
gree,  of  the  Order  of  Sons  of  Liberty,  which 
says:  "The  Government  designated  the  Uni 
ted  States  of  America,  has  no  sovereignty, 
because  that  is  an  attribute  belonging  to  the 
people  in  their  respective  State  organizations;" 
is  not  that  really  the  foundation  stone  of  the 
present  rebellion?  Article  7  says,  in  accord- 
with  this  principle,  "the  Federal  Gov- 


have  thus  assumed)  to  exercise  power  not 
delegated,  they  should  be  regarded  and  dealt 
with  as  usurpers." 

We  proceed  to  Article  10,  which  says: 
"Whenever  the  officials,  to  whom  the  people 
have  intrusted  the  powers  of  the  Government, 
shall  refuse  to  administer  it  in  strict  accord 
ance  with  its  Constitution,  and  shall  assume 
and  exercise  power  or  authority  not  dele 
gated,  it  is  the  inherent  right  and  imperative 
duty  of  the  people  to  resist  such  officials,  and 
if  need  be,  expel  them  by  force  of  arms. 
Such  resistance  is  not  revolution,  but  is  solely 
the  assertion  of  right."  Now,  with  the  in 
terests  of  a  great  nation  resting  upon  your 
decision,  I  ask  you,  gentlemen  of  this  Court, 
is  it  lawful  or  unlawful  for  a  set  of  men  to 
combine  and  agree  together  that  whenever. 
in  their  judgment,  the  Government  is  exer 
cising  powers  not  delegated,  it  shall  be  ex- 

ernment  can  exercise  only  delegated  power:  [  pelled  by  force  of  arms?  Gentlemen,  what 
hence,  if  those  who  shall  have  been  chosen  to  I  say  you?  Is  it  not  admitted  by  all  loyal  men 
administer  that  Government,  shall  assume  to  that  the  only  legal  mode  of  setting  aside  a 
exercise  power  not  delegated,  they  should  be  Government  which  may  be  exercising  pow- 
rcgarded  and  dealt  with  as  usurpers."  This !  ers  not  delegated  is,  if  the  President,  by  ini- 
clausc  of  the  ritual  should  be  borne  in  mind  peachment  or  by  ballot;  if,  then,  it  is  illegal 


while  seeking  to  discover  the  meaning  of  the 
obligation. 


to  expel  the  officials  of  the  Government  by  force 
of  arms,  this  organization  is  a  conspiracy perte. 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


269 


Article  11  of  the  Ritual  of  the  Order  of 
Sons  of  Liberty  says:  "It,  is  incompatible 
with  the  history  and  nature  of  our  system  of 
Government,  that  Federal  authority  should 
coerce  by  arms  a  sovereign  State;'1  and  Art. 
12  declares,  "Upon  the  preservation  of  the 
sovereignty  of  the  States,  depends  the  preser 
vation  of  civil  and  personal  liberty.1'  Gen 
tlemen,  are  these,  or  are  they  not  the  princi 
ples  enunciated  and  upheld  by  those  in  arms 
against  this  Government?  Does  the  dissemi 
nation  of  these  doctrines  by  a  large  body  of 
men  in  these  Northern  States  tend  to  weaken 
the  Government,  or  to  strengthen  it?  Does  it, 
or  does  it  not  tend  to  encourage  and  strengthen 
the  rebellion  ?  They  are  the  principles  dia 
metrically  opposed  to  those  for  which  our 
Government,  is  struggling,  and  for  which  our 
armies  are  fighting.  I  ask  you,  is  an  organ 
ization  that  meets  in  midnight  council,  to  dis 
seminate  these  damnable  doctrines,  loyal  or 
disloyal?  Is  it  legal  or  illegal? 

We  come  now  to  the  obligation;  and  in  con 
sidering  that,  as  I  have  before  remarked,  we 
must  do  so  from  their  stand-point.  In  reading 
the  argument  of  the  counsel,  (Mr.  Coffroth,)  I 
am  astonished  that  he  should  give  this  Court 
credit  for  so  little  acumen  or  judgment.  The 
part  of  the  obligation  which  the  gentleman 
cites,  is  as  follows:  "I  do  further  swear  that  I 
will  at  all  times,  if  needs  be,  take  up  arms  in 
the  cause  of  the  oppressed — in  my  own  coun 
try  first  of  all — against  any  monarch,  prince, 
potentate,  powei',  or  government  usurped, 
which  may  be  found  in  arms,  waging  war 
against  a  people  or  peoples,  who  are  endeavor 
ing  to  establish  or  have  inaugurated  a  govern^ 
ment  for  themselves,  in  accordance  with,  and 
founded  upon,  the  eternal  principles  of  truth, 
which  I  have  sworn  in  the  Vestibule,  and  now 
in  this  presence  do  swear  to  maintain  invio 
late,  and  defend  with  my  life."  The  sentence 
following  this,  and  which  the  gentleman  has 
omitted  to  quote,  is  as  follows:  "This  I  do 
promise,  without  reservation  or  evasion  of 
mind;  without  regard  to  the  name,  station, 
condition  or  designation  of  the  invading  or 
coercing  power,  whether  it  shall  arise  within 
or  come  from  without!  " 

In  considering  the  first  part  of  this  obliga 
tion,  the  gentleman  proceeds  to  "analyze"  it; 
and  says:  "We  will  therefore  confine  our  re 
marks  to  the  last  proposition;  that  is,  as  to  a 
power  or  government  usurped;  and  I  here  ask 
the  learned  Judge  Advocate  if  he  is  prepared 
to  proclaim  to  the  world  that  this  Government 
is  an  usurped  one,  in  order  to  make  this  obli 
gation  to  take  up  arms  apply  to  it?"  Now 
this  is  a  singular  manner  of  arguing  the  ques 
tion;  it  pro-supposes  want  of  ordinary  intelli 
gence  on  the  part  of  this  Court,  and  all  con 
cerned  in  this  trial.  When  the  members  of 
the  Order  of  American  Knights,  or  Sons  of 
Liberty,  offer  to  take  up  arms  against  any 
power  or  government  usurped,  we  do  not  ask, 
what  government  is  really  usurped?  but  what 
government  do  they  claim  to  be  usurped? 
And  what  government  do  they  consider  and 
claim  to  be  exercising  undelegated  or  usurped 
powers?  Messrs.  Corlew,  Bird,  Loughridge 
and  Burton,  all  witnesses  for  the  defense,  have 


explicitly  stated  that  the  Government,  or  the 
President,  was  exercising  authority  and  pow 
ers  not  delegated;  and  therefore,  according  to 
Article  7 — to  which  they  have  all  subscribed — 
was  a  usurpation,  and  should  be  dealt  with  as 
such;  and,  according  to  Article  10,  should  bo 
expelled  by  force  of  arms.  The  obligation  but 
reiterates  the  doctrines  enunciated  in  Article 
10  of  the  Ritual. 

I  do  not  need  to  go  to  the  statements  of  the 
witnesses  on  the  part  of  the  accused,  to  show- 
that  these  are  their  principles,  but  I  will  take 
the  statements  of  the  accused  himself;  for  I 
take  it  that  the  accused  must  be  bound  by  the 
statements  which  he  submits  by  his  counsel. 
He  says:  "I  have  no  purpose  to  conceal  the 
views  of  Mr.  Milligan;  and  freely  admit  that 
he  may  have  said,  what  every  intelligent  man 
in  America  knows,  that  both  the  President,  the 
Congress  and  the  military  authorities  have 
each  exercised  particular  powers,  that  did  not 
belong  to  them."  The  gentleman  asserts  be 
fore  this  Court,  that  not  only  the  President, 
but  Congress  and  the  military  authorities 
have  exercised  undelcgated  powers;  therefore, 
according  to  the  principles  sworn  and  sub 
scribed  to  by  members  of  the  Order,  they  are 
all  usurpers,  and  should  be  expelled  from  their 
places  by  force  of  arms;  not  only  the  Presi 
dent,  but  Congress  and  the  army.  Mr.  Cof 
froth,  it  only  needs  that  your  client  be  turned 
loose  to  walk  in  the  streets,  take  up  his 
arms  and  join  the  rebel  ranks,  to  carry  out  the 
doctrines  that  you  enunciate  for  him  in  this 
Court. 

When  I  stated,  at  the  opening  of  my  review 
of  this  organization,  that  the  gentleman  had 
falsified  the  record,  had  misrepresented  the 
proof,  I  said  what  I  stand  ready  here  to  prove 
from  the  record.  But  half  a  page  below  where 
the  gentleman  makes  the  assertion  just  quoted, 
he  says:  "But  if  anyone  should,  unfortunately 
for  the  defense,  be  of  opinion  that  the  Govern 
ment  is  a  usurpation,  still  I  insist,  that  neither 
the  defendants  as  individuals,  nor  the  Order 
of  American  Knights  or  Sons  of  Liberty,  ever 
entertained  or  expressed  such  sentiments,  but 
that  they  have  ever  treated  the  Government, 
including  the  President,  the  Courts,  the  Con 
gress,  and  the  Army,  as  legitimate,  each  in 
its  own  sphere."  In  reply  to  this,  I  simply 
submit  the  statement  of  the  accused,  Mr. 
Milligan  himself,  through  his  counsel,  Mr. 
CofFroth,  and  the  statements  of  the  wit 
nesses  just  referred  to,  and  the  Ritual  of 
the  organization,  to  which  every  member  of 
the  Sons  of  Liberty  has  sworn  allegiance.  In 
addition,  I  quote  from  the  resolution  sent  up 
to  the  Grand  Council  by  Mr.  Milligan,  by  the 
hand  of  Mr.  Winters,  the  preamble  to  which 
says:  "  A  crisis  has  arisen  in  the  history  of 
the  Federal  Government,  in  relation  to  the 
rights  of  the  States,  whether  delegated  or  re 
served;  the  manifest  usurpations  of  undele- 
gated  powers  by  the  President;  the  utter  dis 
regard  of  all  constitutional  guarantees  of  lib 
erty,  looking  constantly  to  the  subjugation  of 
States  and  the  establishment  of  a  centralized 
despotism,  already  fill  us  with  alarm  for  the 
cause  of  civil  liberty  in  America." 

To  show  that  the  accused,  Mr.  Milligau,  is 


270 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


not  the  saint  of  submission  that  he  has  been 
pictured  by  his  counsel,  I  quote  the  following 
resolutions:  "  Re  solved,  That  the  right  to  alter 
or  abolish  their  Government,  whenever  it  fails 
to  secure  the  blessings  of  liberty,  is  one  of  the 
inalienable  rights  of  the  people,  that  can  never 
be  surrendered;  nor  is  the  right  to  maintain 
H  Goverijment  that  does  secure  the  blessings  of 
liberty,  less  sacred  and  inalienable;  therefore 
we  declare  that  patriotism  and  manhood  alike 
enjoin  upon  us  resistance  to  usurpation  as  the 
highest  and  holiest  duty  of  freemen."  That  is 
the  first  resolution.  Resolution  6  says:  "That 
there  is  a  point  at  which  submission  merges 
the  man  in  the  slave,  and  resistance  becomes 
a  duty.  Whether  that  point,  in  the  history  of 
the  times,  has  arrived,  may  be  debated ;  but 
we  will  resist,  by  force,  any  attempt  to  abridge 
the  elective  franchise,  whether  by  the  intro 
duction  of  illegal  votes,  under  military  author 
ity,  or  the  attempt  by  Federal  officers  to  intim 
idate  the  citizens  by  threats  of  oppression." 
It  will  be  remembered  that  these  resolutions, 
drawn  up  by  Mr.  Milligan,  and  sent  by  him 
to  the  Grand  Council,  were  published  in 
pamphlet  form,  and  circulated  in  the  county 
temples.  The  pamphlet  contained  also  the  ad 
dress  of  Dodd.  These  two  documents  prove 
the  old  adage  that  great  minds  often  think 
alike.  Here  are  the  Grand  Commander  of  the 
State  and  a  Major  General  of  the  Order  issu 
ing  documents  to  the  world,  drawn  up  at  dif 
ferent  times  and  in  different  places,  but  both 
enunciating  substantially  the  same  principles, 
and,  in  many  instances,  using  almost  precisely 
the  same  words  and  phraseology.  I  will  make 
but  one  or  two  quotations  from  this  address; 
which  has  been  so  frequently  referred  to,  that 
the  Court  will  remember  it:  "If  these  men  be 
prolonged  in  power,  they  must  either  consent 
to  be  content  to  exercise  the  power  delegated 
by  the  people,  or,  by  the  gods,  they  must  prove 
themselves  physically  the  stronger.  This  po 
sition  is  demanded  by  every  true  member  of 
this  fraternity;  honor,  life — aye,  more  than 
life — the  virtue  of  our  wives  and  daughters 
demand  it;  and  if  you  intend  to  make  this 
organization  of  any  practical  value,  you  will 
do  one  of  two  things — either  take  steps  to 
work  the  political  regeneration  of  the  party 
with  which  we  are  affiliated,  up  to  this  stand 
ard,  or  reljdrig  upon  ourselves,  determine  at 
once  our  plan  of  action." 

To  show  the  construction  put  upon  the  obli- 
gat  ion  by  members  of  the  order,  and  what 
they  concede  were  the  purposes  of  the  organ 
ization,  I  quote  from  Dodd's  speech,  in  which 
he  gives  what  he  claims  to  be  the  opinions 
and  counsel  of  the  Supreme  Commander,  Mr. 
Vallandigham.  This  document  was  issued  by 
Dodd  for  general  use  in  the  order.  He  could 
not  have  used  Mr.  Vallandigham's  name  in 
this  manner  without  its  having  been  brought 
to  his  notice;  we  may,  therefore,  reasonably 
conclude,  that  in  this  publication  the  views  of 
Mr.  Vallandigham  were  given  as  Mr.  Dodd 
had  received  them  from  him,  and  that  the  Su 
preme  Commander  of  this  Order  gave  the 
correct  exposition  of  its  intents  and  pur 
poses. 

In   speaking  of  Vallandigham,  Dodd  says: 


|  "He  counsels  late  action  on  the  part  of  State 

|  conventions;  thinks  Ohio  is  called  too  soon — 

j  advising  that  Indiana  should  have  hers,  say, 

I  first    of    June.     He    finally  judges    that   the 

Washington  power  will  not  yield  up  its  power, 

until  it  is  taken  from  them  by  an  indignant 

people,  by  force  of  arms.     He  intimates  that 

parties — men  and  interests — will  divide  into 

two  classes,  and  that  a  conflict  will  ensue  for 

the  mastery." 

Mr.  Dodd  then  continues:  "Sons  of  Lib(rt>/. 
arise!  The  day  is  rapidly  approaching,  in  the 
which  you  can  make  good  your  promises  to 
your  country.  The  furnace  is  fteing  heated 
that  will  prove  your  sincerity — the  hour  for 
daring  deeds  is  not  distant — let  the  watch 
word  be,  Onward!  And  let  the  result  bless 
mankind  with  Republican  Government,  in  this, 
our  beloved  land,  to  their  latest  posterity." 
Does  this  utterance  of  Mr.  Dodd  send  forth  any 
uncertain  sound?  Can  it  be  said  that  any 
member  of  this  order  who  had  taken  the  ob 
ligation,  and  had  heard  read  the  lesson  of 
only  the  first  degree,  could  not  understand 
what  was  meant  by  this  manifesto?  Harrison 
swears  that  copies  of  this  pamphlet  were  sent 
to  Messrs.  Milligan,  Humphreys,  and  he  thinks, 
Bowles.  Even  if  Mr.  Milligan  had  not  re 
ceived  one  of  the  documents  in  which  were 
published  his  own  resolutions,  by  the  ordinary 
channels  of  the  order;  beyond  question,  he 
would  seek  to  obtain  a  copy;  and  can  it  well 
be  claimed,  that  with  this  document,  published 
soon  after  the  2'2d  of  February,  in  his  hand, 
he  still  had  no  knowledge  of  the  contemplated 
uprising  or  insurrection  by  the  members  of 
this  order:  that  he  had  no  idea  of  its  illegal 
purposes  or  intents?  Can  any  rational  man 
read  these  utterances  of  Mr  Milligan  himself, 
or  the  obligation  and  oaths  of  this  ritual,  and 
say  that  he  was  ignorant  of  the  evil  purposes 
of  this  organization? 

This  bitterness  appears  to  culminate  in  his 
hatred  of  General  Carrington.  I  do  not  won 
der  that  Mr.  Milligan  should  entertain  this 
feeling,  for  it  is  mainly  due  to  the  General 
that  the  evil  designs  of  the  order  were  brought 
to  light  and  frustrated.  Out  of  justice  to  a 
brother  officer,  who  has  served  his  country 
faithfully  and  well,  and  with  a  singleness  of 
purpose,  I  am  compelled  to  notice  some  of  the 
vile  slanders  and  misrepresentations  con 
tained  in  this  argument.  He  says,  first,  "  It 
may  have  been  some  bosom  friend  of  General 
Carrington  a  la  Stidger  and  Zumro."  And 
again :  "  What  a  grand  spectacle  it  would 
present!  How  proud  would  be  the  bearing  of 
that  brave  and  gallant  General  who  has,  by  his 
paid  spies  and  informers,  been  so  industri 
ously  extending  this  order — duping  innocent 
men  into  it,  initiating  rebel  officers,  carrying 
messages  between  Dodd  &  Co.  and  traitors 
in  arms,  and  facilitating  by  all  possible  means 
'  the  grand  carnival  of  blood  that  was  to  have 
j  taken  place  at  this  city  on  the  10th  of  last 
!  August."  The  true  meaning  and  effect  of 
which  is  that  General  Carrington  was  aiding 
this  conspiracy ;  for  the  counsel  explicitly 
says  that  he  was  "facilitating  by  all  possible 
means  the  grand  carnival  of  blood  that  was 
to  have  taken  place  at  this  city  oh  the  lt)th  of 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


271 


last  August."  The  counsel  knew,  as  he 
penned  those  words,  that  it  was  a  vile  slander 
and  a  falsehood;  he  knew  that  General  Car- 
ringtou's  sole  purpose  was  to  bring  to  justice 
the  members  of  this  conspiracy,  and  that  to 
do  this,  he  had  to  employ  men  to  become 
acquainted  with  their  designs  and  movements, 
and  to  apprise  him  of  the  same.  He  neither 
extended,  nor  aided  in  extending  the  order. 
The  men  who  joined  the  order  for  the  purpose 
of  revealing  its  acts  to  the  Government,  did 
simply  what  they  had  to  do  to  keep  suspicion 
from  them;  they  acted  the  part  of  members  of 
the  order.  Again  the  counsel  says:  "And 
yet  Carrington  paid  and  encouraged  Stidger 
to  extend,  as  rapidly  as  possible,  an  organiza 
tion  that  is  claimed  to  be  treasonable."  Now, 
the  proof  shows  that  Stidger  was  never  in  any 
manner  hired,  or  paid  a  dollar  by  General 
Carrington ;  that  he  was  never  employed  to 
extend  the  order  by  any  person  outside  of  the 
organization.  Stidger  received  instructions 
from  Captain  Jones,  Provost  Marshal  at  Lou 
isville,  to  keep  himself  advised  of  the  move 
ments  and  designs  of  the  members  of  this  or 
der,  and  by  him  was  employed  and  paid.  Hs 
was  appointed  or  elected  Grand  Secretary  of 
the  order,  and  performed  the  duties  of  that  of 
fice,  no  more  and  no  less.  Dr.  Zumro  acted  in 
like  manner.  Why  this  bitterness  toward  the 
men  that  have  revealed  the  designs  and  pur 
poses  of  the  order,  if  it  be  so  pure  in  its  or 
ganization  and  acts?  On  no  single  point 
have  the  accused  attempted  to  rebut  or  dis 
prove  the  statements  of  Stidger;  they  have 
not  dared  to  do  so;  nor  have  they  questioned 
the  probity  of  any  of  Mr.  Stidger's  state 
ments,  bat  have  indulged  in  bitter,  unworthy 
vituperation  against  him. 

Tlu  counsel  then  proceeds  to  a  considera 
tion  of  the  "obnoxious  obligation,"  to  ascertain 
if  it  is  not"  consistent  with  patriotism  and  most 
devote  I  loyalty."  He  says  :  "let  us,  therefore, 
examine  whether  the  contingency  has  hap 
pened,  upon  which  they  obligated  themselves 
to  take  up  arms,  with  reference  to  the  subject, 
matter,  and  the  people  or  peoples  for  whom 
and  in  whose  behalf  they  propose  to  volunteer. 
And  we  inquire,  where  is  that  people  'who 
h-ive  established  or  inaugurated  a  Govern 
ment  of  their  own  free  choice,  and  in  accord 
ance  with  and  founded  upon  the  eternal  prin 
ciples  of  truth?'  "  He  says  further,  "It  will 
not  do  to  say  that  the  Southern  Confederacy 
is  that  people,  for  it  would  be  a  eulogy  on  Jeff 
Davis'  government  more  glowing  than  any 
son  of  liberty  ever  uttered.  Is  their  cause 
that  of  the  oppressed?  Is  our  Government  a 
usurpation?  Is  the  Southern  Confederacy 
founded  upon  the  eternal  principles  of  truth?" 
[  answer  him  ;  the  members  of  this  order  have 
s  lid  that  their  cause  was  that  of  the  op- 
pre'-wvl ;  you  have  said  that  our  Government, 
no\v  Avaging  this  war  against  rebellion,  is  a 
usurpation;  you  have  said  that  the  Southern 
Confvloracy  is  founded  upon  the  eternal  prin 
ciples  of  truth;  and  therefore  we  try  and 
judge  you  by  the  principles  you  yourselves 
have  enunciated. 

Again,  this  singular  argument  says:  "and 
I  submit,  that  the  conduct  of  Mr.  Bingham  is 


in  commendable  contrast  to  that  of  the  au 
thorities.  So  soon  as  he  was  informed  of 
Dodd's  proposed  plot,  his  best  efforts  were  at 
once  directed  to  paralyze  that  embryo  rebel 
lion;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  the  authorities 
knew  it  all,  long  before  Mr.  Bingham  did; 
and  instead  of  nipping  it  in  the  bud,  were 
nursing  and  encouraging  it,  so  that  it  might 
bring  forth  fully  ripe  fruit."  Does  the  gen 
tleman  think  that  he  can  make  any  fair 
minded  men  believe  that  the  Government  au 
thorities,  whose  lives,  fortunes  and  honors  are 
staked  on  the  faithful  discharge  of  their  du 
ties,  were  "  nursing  and  encouraging  "  this 
accursed  conspiracy  ?  He  says  further  :  "The 
evidence  of  Stidger,  their  detective  and  wit 
ness,  shows  that  while  under  the  pay  and 
direction  of  Carrington,  and  with  his  consent 
and  approbation,"  etc.  I  here  assert,  that  the 
evidence  of  Stidger  shows  that  he  never  was 
under  the  pay  or  direction  of  General  Car 
rington;  and  I  appeal  to  the  record;  "and 
with  his  consent  and  approbation,  that  he 
(Stidger)  was  extending  the  order  as  rapidly 
as  possible,  both  in  Indiana  and  Kentucky, 
that  with  the  same  approbation  he  initiated 
rebel  officers,  and  carried  messages  between 
Dodd  and  others  and  officers  in  the  Confeder 
ate  service,  and  afforded  every  facility  to  Dodd 
and  his  immediate  confederates  to  arrange, 
perfect  and  accomplish  the  inauguration  of 
civil  war  in  Indiana,  keeping  the  authorities 
here  advised  of  every  movement,  by  regular 
and  frequent  reports — and  all  this  for  the  sole 
purpose  of  influencing  the  then  pending  elec 
tions."  I  say  to  the  Court,  that  there  is  not 
one  particle  of  evidence  on  the  part  of  Stid 
ger,  or  any  other  witness,  "that  while  under 
the  pay  and  direction  of  Carrington,  and  with 
his  consent  and  approbation,  he  (Stidger)  was 

extending   the   order in  Indiana   and 

Kentucky,"  or  that  General  Carrington  knew 
any  thing  about  it  until  after  the  reports  had 
been  submitted  by  Stidger;  nor  that  with  the 
"consent  and  approbation  "  of  General  Car 
rington,  Stidger  "carried  messages  between 

Dodd and    officers    in    the   Confederate 

service."  I  ask  the  gentleman,  where,  from 
the  first  page  of  the  record  to  the  last,  there 
is  one  particle  of  evidence  to  show  that  any 
of  these  things  were  done  for  the  "purpose 
of  influencing  the  then  pending  elections  ?;> 
And  this  assertion  is  repeated  again  and  again. 
This  argument,  itself,  is  the  only  political 
thing  that  I  have  seen  in  any  way  connected 
with  this  trial.  Referring  to  the  military  au 
thorities  of  the  Government,  he  says:  "They 
were  fully  advised  of  the  existence  of  what 
they  claim  to  have  been  a  most  infernal  con 
spiracy  against  the  peace  of  the  State — they 
witnessed  the  maturing  of  the  scheme — they 
saw  the  preparation  of  the  brand  that  was  to 
flame  into  civil  war.  Yes,  they  knew  it  all — • 
and  yet  raised  not  a  finger  to  stop  it,  until  it 
was  throttled  by  the  very  men  who  are  de 
nounced  as  its  sympathizers.  Like  the  tiger 
that  stands  at  the  edge  of  his  jungle,  watch 
ing  his  victim,  and  as  the  unfortunate  trav 
eler  comes  along,  springs  upon  him,  crushes 
his  bones  and  laps  up  his  blood,  so  they  looked 
with  savage  delight  upon  the  proposed  upris- 


272 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


ing — regarding  no  other  consequence  excep 
its  probable  influence  upon  the  elections.' 
How  far  in  the  scale  of  untruth  and  want  of 
self-respect  must  a  man  have  descended,  t 
make  these  bald,  vile,  slanderous  assertions 
without  a  scintilla  of  proof  to  found  them 
upon  ! 

I  quote  but  little  more,  and  then  leave  this 
argument — or  rather  this  accumulation  of  li 
bels — to  the  fate  it  deserves.  "  It  seemed  to 
matter  little  to  them  even  though  the  fire  of 
civil  war  should  desolate  our  homes,  and  cause 
the  'shuddering  mother  to  hug  her  babe  more 
closely  to  her  bosom,'  so  that  they  could  only 
remain  masters  of  the  burnt  and  blackenec 
field."  How  false,  and  infamously  slanderous 
this  is,  I  leave  you,  gentlemen  of  the  Commis 
sion,  to  decide. 

I  note  the  following  special  instances  of 
misstatements  of  evidence  by  the  counsel  for 
Mr.  Milligan  : 

Mr.  Coffroth  states  that  Mr.  Ibach  testified 
.that  a  resolution  was  introduced  at  the  Grand 
Council  of  June,  1864,  "pledging  the  order  to 
resistance  to  the  draft,  and  that  it  was  promptly 
and  with  great  unanimity  voted  down;  and 
that  the  belligerent  gentleman  who  introduced 
the  resolution,  went  away  very  much  dissatis 
fied  with  the  order."  There  is  no  such  testi 
mony,  but  simply  that  the  resolution  was  vo 
ted  clown. 
He  states: 

"And  yet  Carrington  paid  and  encouraged 
Stidger  to  extend,  as   rapidly  as  possible,  an 
organization   that  is  claimed  to  be  treasona 
ble."     No  witness  testified  to  such  a  statement. 
He  asserts: 

"But  the  evidence  further  shows  that  both 
the  defendant,  Horsey,  and  the  Government 
witness,  Connell,  denied  and  repudiated  the 
declarations  of  John  W.  Stone."  The  evidence 
does  not  substantiate  this  assertion. 

Again  he  states  that  Mr.  Bingham  "never 
knew  of  any  other  than  its  political  charac 
ter,  until  the  revelation  by  Dodd  of  his  'in 
sane  and  hellish  proposition.' " 

Mr.  Bingham,  on  the  contrary,  testifies  that 
"the  first  idea  I  had  of  its  being  a  militai'y 
organization"  was  in  hearing  Major  Conk- 
lin's  speech  at  the  Grand  Council  of  Feb.  16th 
and  17th,  1864. 

On  the  same  page  he  asserts: 
"The  evidence  of  Stidger,  their  detective  and 
witness,  shows  that  while  under  the  pay  and 
direction  of  Carrington,  and  with  his  consent 
and  approbation,  he  extended  the  order,  and 
perfected  arrangements  to  inaugurate  civil 
war;  and  all  this  for  the  sole  purpose  of  in 
fluencing  the  then  pending  elections." 

Stidger  did  not  so  testify.  Nothing  from 
which  such  an  inference  could  have  been  justly 
drawn. 

On  page  10th,  he  states  that  Bingham 
"quenched  the  flame  that  the  authorities  were 
fanning.  While  they  were  nursing,  he  was 
stifling."  The  evidence  contradicts  that  as 
sertion. 

Again  he  says: 

Long  after  "the  organization  of  the  Grand 
Council  at  Torre  Haute,  that  what  was  termed 
'the  military  bill,'  or  military  feature  of  the 


order,  was  gotten  up."  The  evidence  shows 
that  the  Terre  Haute  meeting  was  held  Aug. 
27th,  1863,  and  the  military  bill  was  introduced 
and  adopted  Sept.  10th,  1863. 

He  states  that  "Dodd's  scheme  required 
'Bingham's'  consent  as  a  condition  prece 
dent;"  and  without  which,  "it  otherwise  could 
not  receive  its  initiatory  impulse."  The  evi 
dence  shows  that  Dodd  desired  Bingham's  co 
operation;  but  it  also  proves  that  when  that 
co-operation  was  withheld,  Dodd  and  Walker 
and  their  co-conspirators,  did  not  abandon 
their  schemes. 

Finally,  he  states  that  Harrison  testifies 
"that  Dodd  instructed  him,  when  he  sent,  him 
to  notify  Mr.  Milligan  to  attend  this  council 
of  the  leading  men  of  the  order,  not  to  inform 
Milligan  of  the  nature  of  the  business."  Mr. 
Harrison  makes  no  such  statement  in  his  tes 
timony. 

One  more  quotation,  and  I  have  done  with 
this  argument.  I  said  that  this  argument 
looked  to  me  as  though  it  had  emanated  from 
the  disloyal  heart  of  Mr.  Milligan  himself; 
that  it  contains  his  bitterness  and  venom 
toward  all  persons  connected  with  the  Govern 
ment,  and  toward  all  the  institutions  of  our 
country.  He  carries  that  venom  to  the  ex 
treme  of  hatred  to  the  people  of  this  nation 
when  exercising  the  elective  franchise.  This 
argument  says:  "But  it  is  not  to  be  expected 
that  gentlemen  of  the  age,  firmness,  honesty 
and  intelligence  of  Mr.  Milligan,  can  change 
their  honest  convictions  upon  political  ques 
tions  to  suit  the  views  of  the  Administration 
brought  into  power  perhaps  by  a  mere,  change 
ling  mob." 

This  is  the  culmination  of  his  hatred  of  our 
free  institutions.  When  the  people  in  their 
might  assert  that  great,  God-given  right  of 
determining  by  whom  they  shall  be  governed, 
and  reiterate  the  sentiment  that  just  govern 
ments  are  instituted  for  the  benefit  of  the  gov- 
rned,  he  calls  them,  when  acting  in  this  noble 
capacity,  a  "changeling  mob!" 

In  considering  the  Ritual  and  obligations  of 

his   order,  I  have  substantially  answered  the 

arguments  of  the  counsel  for  Mr.  Humphreys 

\nd  Dr.  Bowles  upon  those  points,  and  there- 

'orc  do  not  refer  to  them  specially. 

GENERAL  PURPOSES  OF  THE  ORDER. 

I  come  now  to  the  consideration  of  the  gen 
eral   intents   and    purposes   of    the  order,   aa 
shown  by  the  evidence:  or,  in  other  words,  to 
he  consideration  of  what  the  evidence  shows 
was  the  manner  or  means  by  which  the  mem- 
ers  of  the  order  proposed  to  carry  out  the 
mrposes  enunciated  in  the  Ritual,  and  to  the 
xecution  of  which  they  bound  themselves  by 
an  appeal  to  Almighty  God.     The  foundation 
itoncs  of  this  disloyal   structure  were:  First, 
hat  the  States  were  sovereign  and  independ- 
int  governments;    and  that  each  State,  in  its 
lovereign    capacity,    had    a   right   to    secede, 
^hat  whenever  the  Government  de facto,  or  any 
lepartment  of  the  Government  exercised  un- 
lelegated  poAvers,  it   was  a  usurpation ;  and 
hat  the   usurped   Government   was  to  bo  rc- 
novcd   by    force   of    arms;    and    they    bound 
themselves  together  by  oaths  to  overturn  this 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


273 


Government,  which  they  declared  was  exercis 
ing  undelegated  and  usurped  powers.  They 
bound  themselves,  also,  to  "assist  any  people 
or  peoples1'  who  may  be  waging  war  in  "en 
deavoring  to  establish,  or  have  inaugurated,  a 
government  for  themselves,  and  to  resist  any 
coercing  power,"  whether  it  shall  arise  within 
or  conic  from  without  the  Government.  These, 
then,  were  the  common  purposes  of  the  con 
spiracy,  and  its  ultimate  design.  How,  or  by 
what  means  these  purposes,  these  designs, 
were  to  be  carried  into  execution,  was  to  de 
pend,  and  must  have  depended  upon  the  tenor 
of  events,  upon  certain  contingencies  of  time, 
place  and  manner.  All  these  were  to  be  de 
termined  upon  by  the  leaders,  when  a  certain 
set  of  circumstances  should  come  to  pass.  In 
the  minds  of  these  leaders  it  was  a  question 
of  the  time  when  success  would  be  the  most 
certain. 

Then,  in  the  original  purpose  or  purposes  of 
the  conspiracy,  all  were  conspirators  who 
joined  that  organization,  who  heard  that  Rit 
ual  read,  and  took  that  obligation.  They 
united  and  became  one  body  for  the  purpose 
of  carrying  out  these  illegal,  disloyal  arid 
treasonable  purposes.  I  might  stop  without 
introducing  one  particle  of  evidence  as  to  the 
means  by  which  they  intended  to  execute 
these  purposes,  and  rest  the  case  with  perfect 
confidence  after  I  had  once  proven  the  nature 
of  this  order,  that  it  is  disloyal  in  its  incep 
tion  and  in  its  birth,  and  that  the  accused 
were  members  of  the  organization. 

"A  conspiring  together  of  two  or  more  per 
sons  is  sufficiently  an  act,  without  any  step 
taken  in  pursuance  of  the  conspiracy."  Bish 
op's  Criminal  Law,  Par.  313.  Commonwealth  vs. 
Judd,  2  Mass.,  329,  337;  Commonwealth  vs.  Tib- 
bells,  2  Mass.,  536,  538;  Commonwealth  vs.  War 
ren,  6  Mass.,  74.  People  vs.  Mather,  4  Wend., 
229;  Commonwealth  vs.  McKisson,  8  S.  $  R.,  420. 

Bishop,  Criminal  Law,  Vol.  2,  Par.  165,  says: 
"Therefore,  in  conspiracy,  the  thing  intended 
need  not  be  accomplished;  but  the  bare  com 
bination  constitutes  the  crime."  Bishop  cites 
in  support  of  this  principle  numerous  author 
ities. 

No  further  proof  was  necessary  to  warrant 
this  Court  in  finding  every  one  of  the  accused 
guilty  under  the  charges  of  conspiracy,  af 
fording  aid  and  comfort  to  rebels,  inciting  in 
surrection,  disloyal  practices,  and  violation  of 
the  laws  of  war.  Whether  that  proof  has 
been  clear  and  conclusive,  or  not,  is  for  you, 
gentlemen  of  the  Commission,  and  not  for 
myself,  to  determine.  I  have,  however,  gone 
forward,  and  attempted  to  bring  before  this 
Court  the  whole  truth,  to  show  you  how  far 
these  parties  acted  toward  the  consummation 
of  the  cpmmon  purpose.  That  proof  most 
clearly  demonstrates  that  the  "common  de 
sign"  of  the  order  was  to  reorganize  the 
Government  on  the  same  principles  which 
were  the  foundation  of  the  present  rebellion, 
and  are  the  cardinal  principles  of  the  Confed 
erate  Government.  The  rebels  claim  that  they 
had  a  right  to  dissolve  their  connection  with 
the  old  Government.  The  order  conceded  that 
right,  and  pledged  itself  to  assist,  by  force  of 
arms,  any  people  found  waging  war  for  that 
18 


right.  The  order  denominates  the  attempt  on 
the  part  of  the  Government  to  coerce  these 
people  into  submission,  as  an  act  of  tyranny 
and  usurpation;  claiming  that  the  Govern 
ment  had  no  right,  by  force  of  arms,  to  coerce 
a  seceding  State.  The  proof  of  this  point  is 
clear  and  conclusive.  They  pledged  the  or 
der,  and  obligated  themselves,  to  resist  this 
coercion.  The  order  was  political  in  its  char 
acter  only  so  far  as  it  was  intended,  and  did 
attempt,  to  educate  the  masses  of  the  Demo 
cratic  party  up  to  this  belief.  In  this  attempt, 
I  am  glad  to  say  that  it  signally  failed,  and 
I  here  enter  upon  this  record,  and  say  it  to 
meet  the  charge  made  by  Mr.  Milligan  in  this 
Court  that  this  is  a  political  prosecution.  The 
proof  has  shown  that  the  masses  of  the  Demo 
cratic  party  are  loyal  and  true  to  their  Gov 
ernment,  true  to  the  integrity  of  the  Govern 
ment,  and  her  institutions. 

This  order,  however,  in  and  of  itself,  was 
political,  if  secession,  insurrection,  disloyal 
purposes  and  treason  make  it  political.  It 
did  aim  to  educate  the  Democratic  party  up -to 
the  disloyal  stand-point  which  it  had  talcen, 
that  it  might  secure  through  the  ballot-box, 
by  putting  its  chiefs  and  leaders  in  power,  the 
same  ends  which  the  Confederacy  were  fight 
ing  to  achieve.  Failing  in  this,  the  order  pro 
posed  and  was  pledged  to  use  force  of  arms  to 
secure  these  ends.  The  resort  to  force  was 
kept  constantly  in  view;  and  with  relation  to 
this,  the  order  was  organized,  and  made  mili 
tary  in  its  character.  The  details  of  its  mili 
tary  organization  were  confined  to  the  Grand 
Council,  to  a  great  extent,  perhaps,  as  they 
were  regulated  by  laws  passed  at  the  Grand 
Council. 

The  question,  then,  for  the  Court  to  deter 
mine,  is  not  so  much  whether  these  military 
details  were  known  to  the  rank  and  file  of  the 
order,  as  they  were  to  the  members  of  the 
Grand  Council,  of  which  all  the  accused  have 
been  proven  to  be  members;  and  further,  it  is 
not  so  material  whether  the  details,  and  man 
ner,  and  means  by  which  the  purposes  of  thia 
order  were  to  be  carried  out,  were  known  to 
the  rank  and  file  of  the  order,  as  whether 
these  means,  these  details,  were  devised  to 
carry  out  the  common  purposes  to  which  the 
organization,  as  a  body,  had  originally  pledged 
its  members.  Just  so  far  as  these  cardinal 
principles  of  the  order,  which  are  embodied  in 
the  rituals  and  obligations,  warranted  the 
leaders  to  go  in  carrying  these  purposes  into 
execution,  just  to  that  extent,  the  rank  a-nd 
file,  including  all  the  members  of  the  organi 
zation,  were  bound  by  and  responsible  for 
their  acts. 

Roscoe,  in  his  Criminal  Evidence,  says  : 

"In  prosecutions  for  conspiracies,  it  is  an 
established  rule,  that  where  several  persons 
are  proved  to  have  combined  together  fur  the 
same  illegal  purpose,  any  act  done  by  one'of 
the  party  in  pursuance  of  the  original  con 
certed  plan,  and  with  reference  to  the  common 
object,  is,  in  the  contemplation  of  law  as  well 
as  in  sound  reason,  the  act  of  the  whole  party; 
and,  therefore,  the  proof  of  the  act  will  be  ev 
idence  against  any  of  the  others  who  were 
engaged  in  the  same  general  conspiracy,  with- 


274 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


out  regard  to  the  question,  whether  the  pris 
oner  is  proved  to  have  been  concerned  in 
the  particular  transaction."  Phill.  Ev.,  210, 
Sth  cd. 

The  oath  taken  by  the  members  of  this  or 
der,  bound  them  to  obedience  to  their  supe 
riors  as  complete  and  prompt  as  that  of  sol 
diers  in  the  army,  or  of  an  inferior  to  his 
superior  officer.  That  oath,  after  the  member 
had  assented  to  the  principles  enunciated  in 
the  rituals,  pledged  the  common  members  be 
fore  hand  to  become  partlccps  criminis  to  what 
ever  insurrectionary  purposes,  plans,  or  acts 
their  superior  officers  might  design  or  execute. 
As  I  before  said,  they  became  parties  to  the 
common  conspiracy,  the  details  of  which  for 
prudential  reasons  were  confined  to  the 
leaders.  Then  let  us  see  how  far  the  co-opera 
tion  in  this  conspiracy  moved  forward  to  the 
consummation  of  their  purposes. 

Harrison  testifies  that  on  the  10th  of  Sep 
tember,  1863,  when  the  Military  Bill  was 
adopted,  it  was  stated  in  open  council,  "that 
it  was  necessary  to  organize  in  a  military  ca 
pacity,  to  protect  the  rights  of  the  members 
against  the  encroachments  of  the  Administra 
tion."  In  other  words,  to  prepare  to  set  aside 
this  Government,  which  was  using  usurped 
powers.  In  his  cross-examination,  he  testi 
fies  that  the  same  military  feature  existed  in 
both  the  American  Knights  and  the  Sons  of 
Liberty.  Also,  that  the  military  bill  was  intro 
duced  "in  pursuance  of  injunctions  received 
from  Mr.  Wright,  the  originator  of  the  organ-! 
ization  in  this  State.  •=•  *  His  instructions 
were  that  the  order  must  have  a  certain  num 
ber  of  major-generals."  Thus  we  see.  that 
the  ultimate  resort  to  arms,  to  force,  was  one 
of  the  original,  fundamental  principles  of  I 
the  order. 

Bingham  testifies  that  M.  C.  Kerr,  when  he 
t;ame  to  this  city  to  see  about  Dodd's  scheme  of 
revolution,  and  to  assist  in  having  it  stopped, 
Raid  that 

"The  people  of  Washington,  Harrison  and 
Floyd  counties  have  got  the  idea  that  a  revo 
lution  was  impending." 

Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  this  idea  of  revo 
lution,  of  resort  to  arms  to  set  aside  the  Gov 
ernment,  not  only  permeated  the  order  itself 
but  entire  neighborhoods.  Its  purposes  were 
so  generally,  so  universally  known,  that  peo 
ple  who  lived  in  the  sections  where  this 
knowledge  became  prevalent,  sold  their  crops 
and  their  personal  property  that  they  might 
save  it  from  the  general  destruction  which, 
they  expected,  would  follow  the  contemplated 
insurrection. 

Sticlger  testifies  that,  on  the  Gth  of  May, 
18G4,  "Mr.  Heffren  told  me  during  the  evening 
that  ho  could  call  together,  within  twenty-four 
hours,  from  1,000  to  1,500  armed  men  in  that 
section  in  connection  with  that  secret  organ 
ization."  This  statement  stands  unimpeachcd 
and  uncontradicted,  Heffren  only  saying  that 
he  does  not  recollect  the  conversation,  and 
that  it  might  have  taken  place. 

Stidger  saw  Bowles  on  the  9th  of  May, 
1864,  when  Bowles  told  him  that  he  was  a 
'military  chief  of  the  order;"  and  spoke  of 
<hc  co-operation  of  the  forces  of  the  order  in 


Illinois,  Indiana,  Missouri  and  Kentucky  with 
the  rebel  commands  of  Price  and  Buckner. 

Here  we  see  that  Dr.  Bowles,  who  occupied 
the  same  position  in  the  order  that  Milligan 
and  Humphreys  did,  had  knowledge  of  these 
intents  and  purposes  of  the  order,  and  de 
clared  them  to  any  member  of  the  order  who 
chose  to  inquire.  He  had  no  better  means  of 
information,  no  higher  trust  than  the  other 
major-generals — in  fact,  he  did  not  receive 
his  appointment  until  several  months  after 
Milligan  and  Humphreys  were  appointed. 
They  must  have  had  the  same  knowledge. 

From  this  time  forward,  Stidger  testifies  to 
details  of  military  plans,  purposes  and  infor 
mation,  given  to  him  by  Bowles  and  others. 
He  also  states  that  in  Kentucky,  where  the  or 
der  was  organized  by  and  through  the  officers 
in  this  State,  members  "  were  always  in 
structed  regarding  the  military  character  of 
the  order."  He  says  that  they  were  instructed 
"by  Judge  Bullitt,  Dr.  Kalfus,  or  myself,  or 
whoever  initiated  them,  that  the  order  was  for 
the  purpose  of  resisting  the  Government,  by 
force  of  arms,  and  for  assisting  the  South." 

Heffren  makes  a  distinction  between  the 
civil  and  military  parts  of  the  order.  This, 
however,  is  simply  a  matter  of  opinion,  and 
is  of  no  importance  one  way  or  the  other,  BO 
long  as  it  is  proven  that  the  order  had  a  mili 
tary  branch,  and  that  the  military  branch 
was  necessary  to  the  accomplishment  of  the 
purposes  avowed  in  the  fundamental  princi 
ples  of  the  order. 

Heffren,  however,  in  his  testimony,  does  not 
say  that  those  to  whom  arms  were  to  be  given 
belonged  solely  to  the  military  portion  of  the 
order.  On  the  contrary,  he  says,  arming  was 
not  confined  to  the  military  portion  of  the 
order.  The  military  part  of  the  order,  he 
says,  "had  for  its  object  the  separating  of  the 
States  of  Ohio,  Indiana,  Illinois,  Missouri 
and  Kentucky  from  the  Eastern  States,  and 
make  a  North-western  Confederacy ;  and, 
failing  in  that,  join  our  fortunes  with  the 
South."  In  pursuance  of  that  object,  "that 
there  was  half  a  million  dollars  sent  to  Indi 
ana,  Illinois,  and  Kentucky,  I  think  by  rebel 
agents  in  Canada,  for  the  purpose  of  procur 
ing  arms  and  ammunition  for  these  North 
western  States  to  arm  themselves  with." 

"The  arms  thus  bought  were  to  be  used  to 
carry  out  the  plans  of  the  military  part  of 
the  order  by  arming  the  order."  p.  412. 

These  military  objects  were  discussed  in 
Grand  Council,  by  members,  without  reference 
to  their  military  position.  The  discussion  in 
the  September  Council  was  in  open  meeting 
of  the  order;  and  the  nominations  were  first 
made  by  the  delegations  from  the  several  mili 
tary  districts.  In  February,  Mr.  Heffren  says. 
"The  matter  (the  military  objects  of  the  or 
der)  was  talked  of  by  some  of  us;  perhaps 
a  few  of  us  in  a  corner,  or  off  to  one  side." 

Even  in  September,  1804,  when  the  major- 
generals  were  appealed  to  by  Heffren  to  know 
whether  "we,"  by  which  word  he  said,  "I 
mean  the  members  of  the  Order  of  American 
Knights,"  should  submit  to  Dodd's  arrest  or 
fight,  it  is  evident  the  whole  order  was 
expected  to  co-operate,  and  that,  too,  under 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


275 


the  direction  of  the  military  officers  elected 
by  the  civil  organization  of  the  order.  In 
the  Vestibule  degree,  there  is  no  purpose  ap 
parent  but  a  political  one;  but  the  moment 
the  oath  of  the  first  degree  proper  is  adminis 
tered,  the  civil  and  military  parts  of  the  or 
der  become  blended — one  faith,  one  ritual,  one 
oath,  one  act,  and  one  supreme  head  charac 
terizing  the  unity  of  the  order. 

Wilson  said  Dodd  was  to  be  considered  the 
military  head  of  the  order  in  this  State;  and 
that  the  revolution  in  this  State  "was  to  take 
place  by  the  order  of  Mr.  Dodd;  he  was  to 
Bend  out  couriers  to  the  different  commanders 
of  the  several  districts  of  the  State — the  ma 
jor-generals  of  the  four  districts  into  which 
the  State  was  divided — and  they  were  to  send 
out  couriers  into  the  respective  counties  com 
posing  their  several  districts;  they  were  to 
give  notice  of  the  uprising  in  their  counties; 
and  then  it  was  expected  again  that  informa 
tion  would  be  conveyed  to  certain  persons  in 
the  county  that  had  been  prominent  and  lead 
ing  men  in  the  organization,  and  they  were  to 
see  that  it  was  conveyed  to  the  different  town 
ships  in  the  county." 

Wilson  also  adds  that  Dodd's  plan  was 
"known  to  all  the  members  of  the  order  in 
my  county."  With  how  much  plausibility  or 
reason  can  it  be  claimed  or  argued,  that  these 
intents  and  purposes  were  unknown  to  three 
of  the  military  chieftains  of  this  organiza 
tion,  and  yet  were  known  to  the  entire  or 
ganization  in  a  county  in  which  the  society 
was  fully  organized  in  every  township  but 
three. 

The  defense  have  attacked  with  great  bitter 
ness  the  character  of  Mr.  Ileffren.  They  have 
been  unable  to  say  one  word  as  against  Dr.  Wil 
son,  except  that  he  was  an  informer.  Of  Mr. 
Heffren,  I  can  only  say  this:  In  the  past  his 
tory  of  this  State  he  has  been  a  man  of  prom 
inence,  and  a  leading  member  of  the  Demo 
cratic  party,  and  associated  as  a  political  co- 
worker  with  each  of  these  defendants.  For 
four  years  he  was  a  member  of  the  Senate  of 
this  State,  and  was  the  Democratic  candidate 
for  Speaker  in  the  IIouso  of  Representatives 
at  the  session  of  1861. 

Us  h;is  held  a  commission  as  Lieutenant 
Colonel  in  our  army,  which  he  resigned.  The 
only  act  of  his  life  that  I  know  of  or  have 
heard  of  against  him  is,  that  he  became  embit 
tered  against  the  Government  of  the  United 
States,  and  joined  this  disloyal  and  treason 
able  organization.  The  accused  have  been 
unable  to  disprove  any  thing  which  was  ut 
tered  upon  this  stand  by  him.  They  had 
made  no  attempt  to  impeach  him.  Nor  have 
they  attempted  in  any  manner  to  disprove 
on  3  of  the  utterances  of  Dr.  Wilson,  a  man 
wh<jm  every  one  characterizes  as  a  person  of 
undoubted  probity  and  truthfulness.  He  now 
holds  the  position  of  Auditor  of  his  county, 
and  has  the  confidence  of  the  community  in 
which  he  lives.  His  evidence,  not  having 
been  refuted  in  the  slightest  particular,  and 
in  no  respect  being  improbable,  and  no  im 
peachment  having  been  attempted,  must  be 
given  full  credit  and  effect  by  this  Court. 

The  witnesses  introduced  by  the  defense 


show  that  the  order  was  not  purely  political, 
Although  they  testified  with  great  unanimity 
;  that  it  was  designed  as  an  offset  to  the  Union 
I  League,  as  they  had  heard.  But  on  that 
;  point  the  witnesses  stultified  themselves  by 
i  stating^  that  such  members  as  Mr.  Milligan 
,'  had  opposed  the  extension  of  the  order.  Why 
j  oppose  its  extension,  if  it  be  only  designed  as 
j  a  political  organization  to  offset  the  Union 
i  League?  Mr.  Ibach  testifies  that  the  order 
was  political  for  the  purpose  of  advancing 
I  Democratic  principles,  "as  we  understood 
them."  He  also  states  that  at  the  June  Coun- 
|  cil,  "A  young  man  from  the  north  part  of  the 
State  was  very  uneasy  about  the  draft,  and 
thought  the  order  should  do  something."  He 
thought  "we  ought  to  combine."  A  resolution 
was  offered  and  voted  down,  "  That  the  differ 
ent  temples  in  the  counties  should  organize 
for  the  purpose  of  resisting  the  Government. 
*  *  *  It  created  quite  a  turbulent  time 
there.  Some  thought  that  the  order  was  purely 
political,  and  others  that  there  was  a  military 
branch  to  it.  The  majority  of  the  members 
did  not  want  any  military  action,  but  pre 
ferred  to  wait  for  a  change  through  the  elec 
tions."  In  other  words,  the  dissension  was 
not  on  the  right  and  duty  of  resisting  the 
Government,  but  simply  a  question  of  time, 
means  and  policy.  The  relations  of  the  order 
to  the  Government  came  up  again,  as  Mr. 
Ibach  testifies:  "They  had  quite  a  discussion 
about  the  grievances  of  the  Government,  but 
could  not  come  to  an  understanding  about  the 
matter." 

The  same  witness,  who  has  been  so  often  re 
ferred  to  by  the  counsel  for  Mr.  Milligan,  had 
a  muster-roll  of  a  company  headed  by  his 
own  name,  which  was  drawn  up  within  the 
past  eighteen  months,  whose  object  was  to  get 
State  arms,  if  possible,  and  to  drill — not  for 
State  or  Government  service — but,  to  use  his 
words,  to  "protect  ourselves  *  *  *  against 
the  soldiers  that  were  coming  home;  *  *  to 
guard  ourselves  against  what  we  called  en 
croachments  on  our  rights." 

Judge  Wilson  B.  Loughridge,  who  has  been 
so  often  quoted  by  the  defense,  another  of  Mr. 
Milligan's  witnesses,  testifies  that  "it  was  al 
together  a  political  association:  "  that  "it  was 
intended  to  protect  the  members  of  the  Demo 
cratic  party  against  violence,  which  it  was 
thought  had  been  used  against  them  in  par 
ticular  quarters ;  and,  in  short,  to  protect 
the  members  of  the  Democratic  party>  and 
see  that  their  rights  were  never  trampled 
upon." 

Again  he  said:  "The  functions  of  the  or 
ganization,  as  I  understood  it,  were  to  sec  that 
we  had  a  fair  election,  and  maintained  our 
rights.  *  *  To  defend  ourselves;  if  we 
were  assailed,  to  protect  ourselves."  To  do 
this,  "with  just  such  means  as  were  neces 
sary  to  afford  us  protection;  to  exhaust  all 
peaceable  means,  and  if  these  failed,  to  exer 
cise  the  right  of  self-defense."  That  "  we 
were  to  be  protected  wherever  we  were  as 
sailed.  *  *  The  efforts  of  the  members 
were  to  be  mutual  in  protecting  each  other." 
Thu?  it  will  be  seen  that  the  design  and  pur 
poses  of  the  order  were  mutual,  and  were  not 


276 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


to  be  confined  to  peaceable  means,  but  looked 
to  a  final  resort  to  arms. 

The  same  witness  identified  the  tenth  section' 
of  the  Declaration  of  Principles,  read  to  the 
candidate  for  the  first  degree,  as  "one  of  the 
cardinal  principles  of  the  order."  He  also 
said  he  had  "  never  heard  members  dissent 
from  it;"  and  that  in  his  paper,  and  in  his 
speeches,  he  had  expressed  the  opinion  that 
"the  President  was  assuming  powers  not  del 
egated;"  and  that  "the  order  held  to  that  as 
well."  Take  this  admission  in  connection 
with  the  reading  of  the  tenth  section,  and  out 
of  their  own  mouths  they  are  convicted  of 
unlawful  combination  to  achieve  treasonable 
purposes. 

Stephen  G.  Burton,  a  witness  for  Mr. 
Humphreys,  in  his  direct  examination,  testi 
fied  that  the  order  was  political,  and  "  there 
was  nothing  more  taught  in  the  second  or 
third  degree  than  in  the  first."  In  the  cross- 
examination,  I  read  to  the  witness  the  tenth 
section  of  the  Declaration  of  Principles  of 
the  first  degree,  and  asked  what  those  sen 
tences  meant.  He  promptly  answered: 

"They  have  reference  to  counter-revolu 
tion.  '  *  Because  when  one  political  party 
assumes  power,  and  begins  to  trample  on  the 
rights  of  other  citizens,  these  can  take  their 
rights  in  their  own  hands,  and  defend  them 
by  force  of  arms.  My  idea  is  that  it  is  right 
for  a  free  American  citizen  to  defend  his  rights 
by  force  when  they  are  trampled  upon."  I 
further  asked:  "Was  it  one  of  the  purposes 
of  the  order,  that  in  case  of  these  encroach 
ments  referred  to,  and  the  trampling  upon 
their  rights,  that  this  order  should  resist  it  by 
force  of  arms?" 

He  answered  :   "  Yes,  sir." 

Thus  I  need  no  explanation  of  the  intents 
and  purposes  of  this  order,  or  its  illegal  and 
treasonable  designs,  by  the  witnesses  for  the 
Government.  The  defense  themselves  have 
made  that  proof  for  me.  In  examining  this 
proof  it  must  be  kept  in  mind  what  they  claim 
were  encroachments,  usurpations,  antl  tramp 
ling  upon  their  rights  or  the  rights  of  any  people, 
and  in  case  they  deemed  them  to  exist,  how, 
from  their  stand-point,  they  proposed  to  act. 

The  examination  of  this  witness  continued  : 

"  Q.  The  ritual  claims  the  right  of  resistance 
'whenever  the  officials  assume  and  exercise 
power  not  delegated.'  Has  not  the  order 
claimed  that  the  Government  was  exercising 
power  not  delegated?  Have  you  not  so 
claimed  ? 

"A,  I  have  frequently  claimed  that  it  had 
assumed  powers  not  delegated. 

"Q.  Has  not  the  order  also  claimed  this? 

"A.  I  suppose  it  has. 

"Q.  Was  not  this  one  of  its  principles? 

"A.  I  suppose  it  was.  The  Government  had 
assumed  too  much  power. 


Here,  gentlemen,  is  the  explanation  given 
by  their  own  witnesses  of  their  own  under 
standing  of  this  combination  which  they  had 
entered  into.  This  obligation,  which  they  had 
taken  upon  themselves,  defines  whether  the 
purposes  of  the  combination  were  legal  or  il 
legal. 

Let  us  glance  for  a  moment  at  a  few  of  the 
overt  acts  of  treason  enacted  in  pursuance  of 
the  general  purposes  of  the  order.  First,  as  to 
the  drilling  and  arming  of  the  order. 

Teny  testifies  that,  in  Martin  county,  the 
order  "drilled  a  few  times  in  the  township," 
and  "that  they  were  getting  arms  all  the  time." 

In  speaking  of  the  order,  I  do  so  without  ref 
erence  to  whether  it  went  under  the  name  of 
the  Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle,  American 
Knights  or  Sons  of  Liberty:  for  I  think  I 
have  sufficiently  shown  that  one  was  but  the 
outgrowth  of  the  other,  and  that  they  were  all 
one  and  the  same  general  conspiracy,  actu 
ated  by  the  same  motives,  and  moving  for 
ward  to  the  consummation  of  the  same  pur 
poses,  and  as  a  general  rule  containing  the 
same  members. 

Council  and  Heffrcn  both  testify  as  to Horsey's 
having  brought  ammunition  to  his  own  home 
in  Martin  county,  and  Heft'ren  as  to  its  being 
concealed  upon  Horsey's  premises. 

Robertson  testifies  to  the  arming  and  drill 
ing  of  the  order  in  Randolph  county,  of  its 
purpose  to  resist  the  draft  and  arbitrary  ar 
rests,  whenever  the  emergency  arose,  or  the 
beads  of  the  order  demanded  it.  He  details 
the  military  organization  of  their  lodge. 

The  order  in  Washington  county  was  gen 
erally  armed,  and  \$1,000  was  placed  at  the 
disposal  of  the  order  in  that  county,  in  June 
last,  by  Dr.  Bowles,  for  the  purpose  of  pur 
chasing  arms  for  those  unable  to  arm  them 
selves,  as  Hcffren  and  Wilson  both  testify. 
This  was  a  month  nearly  before  the  Confeder 
acy  tendered  to  the  order,  at  the  Chicago  con 
clave,  $2,000,000  for  revolutionary  purposes. 

In  regard  to  arming  the  order  in  this  place, 
Harrison  testifies  to  the  arrival  of  arms,  pis- 
ols  and  fixed  ammunition,  consigned  by 
Walker  to  J.  J.  Parsons,  a  member  of  the  or- 
:ler,  and  concealed  in  Dodd's  building — which 
were  purchased  shortly  after  the  Chicago  con 
clave.  Colonel  A.  J.  Warner  also  testifies  to 
the  seizure  of  these  arms. 

Stidgcr  testifies  that  "Bowles  made  a  state 
ment  in  the  Council  of  the  14th  of  June,  that 
the  organization  in  his  county  numbered 
about  GOO  men;  but  that  there  was  a  military 
organization  amounting  to  900  men,  armed 
and  equipped.  *  *  He  also  stated  that  he 
had  an  arrangement  with  a  man  to  furnish 
any  number  or  kind  of  arms."  Also,  that  in 
August,  Bowles  wanted  to  get  arms  of  Peters, 
of  Cincinnati,  and  B.  C.  Kent,  of  New  Al- 
ibany;  and  asked  Stidger  to  have  "three  or 


Q.  In  case  of  such  assumption  of  power,  four  thousand  lances  made.' 

was    the    remedy  contained    in   these  words:  Stidger   also    says:      "I    was    told   by    Mr. 

'It  is  the  inherent  right  and  imperative  duty  Kern,  a  membe.r  of  the  order,  that  Judge  Wil- 

of  the  people  to   resist  such  officials,  and,  if  liams,  of  Kentucky,  had  given  §100,  and  other 


need  be,  expel  them  by  force  of  arms?' 

"Q.  Was  that  the  remedy  proposed  by  the 

order  ? 

"A.  Yes,  sir." 


members  $200  more  for  organizing  the  order, 
and  that  he  hnd  expended  that  money  in  the 
purchase  of  arms,  and  that  they  had  sent  the 
men,  with  the  arms,  South." 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


277 


Greek  fire  was  one  of  the  appliances  of  the 
order,  to  be  used  to  destroy  Government  prop 
erty,  as  Stidger,  Wilson  and  Heffren  testify, 
and  had  been  used  for  that  purpose.  It  is  true 
Docking  attempts  to  explain  and  refute  some 
of  the  evidence  of  these  witnesses;  but  his 
story,  in  and  of  itself,  is  so  contradictory,  im 
probable  and  entirely  contemptible,  that  the 
defense  themselves  have  hardly  dared  to  claim 
any  weight  for  it.  The  whole  effect  of  his  tes 
timony  upon  the  minds  of  the  members  of  this 
Commission,  must  have  been  to  corroborate 
Stidger  and  the  statements  of  the  Government 
witnesses.  He  admits  the  receiptof  the  $200  00. 
He  admits  that  he  was  present  at  the  meeting 
of  members  of  the  order  at  the  Louisville  Ho 
tel,  in  Louisville,  which  was  referred  to>  by 
Stidger.  Mr.  Booking  stated  that  he  was 
very  much  out  of  health,  and  went  to  the 
Springs,  where  Dr.  Bowles  resided,  for  his 
health — to  recuperate  his  decaying  vital  pow 
ers — and  as  the  result  of  this  stay,  took  din 
ner  at  these  Springs,  and  left  after  a  long  in 
terview  with  Bowles;  and  that  being  entirely 
out  of  money,  and  hard  up,  he  went  to  the 
Louisville  Hotel,  at  Louisville.  Yet  he  says  he 
had  no  business  whatever  to  call  him  there, 
nor  any  thing  whatever  to  do;  and  that  while 
there,  he  made  and  explained  to  these  gentle 
men  at  that  Hotel,  all  about  his  shells,  hand- 
grenades  and  Gre-.k  fire;  and  that  still  being 
hard  up,  though  having  received  $200  00,  he 
travels  to  Indianapolis  and  spends  a  week, 
then  goes  to  Detroit  and  spends  a  week,  thence 
to  Cincinnati,  from  Cincinnati  to  Adams  coun 
ty,  Ohio,  from  Adams  county  to  Cincinnati, 
and  from  Cincinnati  to  this  city,  where  he  has 
remained  ever  since.  Concealing  the  fact  that 
he  was  at  Windsor,  Canada,  until  it  is  un  wil 
ling' y  drawn  from  him,  he  admits  that  on  this 
trip,  in  April  or  May,  he  stopped  for  two  w«eks 
at  the  house  of  the  rebel  Colonel  Steele,  in 
Windsor,  Canada,  free  of  charge,  without  busi 
ness  or  employment,  or  design  of  any  kind,  as 
he  swears,  in  going  there.  All  this  is  suffi 
cient  to  give  this  Commission  an  understand 
ing  of  the  motives,  and  bias  and  weight  to  be 
given  to  Booking's  testimony. 

OPPOSITION    TO    THE    DRAFT. 

This  order  was  pledged,  as  a  body,  not  to 
serve  in  our  army.  They  were  sworn  not  to 
enter  the  service  of  the  Government  for  pay. 
(See  Obligation  of  the  Second  Degree.)  Its 
members  were  even  taught  that  the  prosecu 
tion  of  the  war  was  a  usurpation  of  power. 
Its  teachings,  as  a  natural  result,  led  to  oppo 
sition  to  the  draft.  In  Wells  county,  its  mem 
bers,  in  their  temple,  discussed  opposition  to 
the  draft.  Joseph  Johnson,  a  witness  for  the 
defense,  says:  "Some  said,  I  will  resist;  some 
said.  I  will  fight,  or  run  off,  or  do  something 
else."  The  temple  in  Rock  Creek  township, 
Wells  county,  sent  committees  to  other  places, 
to  learn  what  the  order  should  do  about  the 
draft.  Milligan  counseled  resistance,  but  oth- 
crsof  theorderthoughtthat  impolitic.  Zumro 
and  Johnson  both  testified  that  they  had  a 
military  organization  in  their  temple.  A  fla 
grant  appeal  to  the  people  to  resist  the  draft 
and  to  discourage  enlistment,  is  the  speech  of 


Mr.  Milligan  at  the  gathering  of  the  order, 
arid  others,  at  Fort  Wayne,  on  the  14th  of  Au 
gust,  1863.  It  is  a  matter  of  public  history 
that  this  Convention  denounced  the  draft  as 
the  most  damnable  of  all  the  outrages  perpe 
trated  by  this  Administration.  Yet  so  far  from 
denouncing  that  resolution  and  others  of  kin 
dred  disloyalty,  Mr.  Milligan  went  into  an 
elaborate  defense  of  the  South,  denouncing 
the  Government,  and  the  war,  and  the  purpose 
for  which  it  was  waged. 

COMMUNICATION    WITH    REBELS. 

I  come  now  to  consider  next  the  acts  of  this 
order,  as  a  body,  as  to  their  communication  and 
concert  of  action  with  the  rebels. 

Stidger  testifies  that  he  was  taken  for  a 
rebel  commissioner,  when  he  first  visited  Sa 
lem.  Heffren  corroborates  this  statement, 
saying:  "It  is  possible  some  man  played  him 
self  off  on  Stidger,  at  that  time,  for  me.  A 
great  many  men  about  Salem,  at  that  time, 
were  expecting  a  man  from  Cumberland  Gap, 
to  report  rebel  movements." 

Bowles  stated,  in  the  presence  of  Stidger, 
"that  they  had  sent  a  man  named  Dickerson 
to  Richmond,  to  have  the  Confederate  author 
ities  send  an  invading  force  to  act  in  concert 
with  their  order." 

Stidger  says,  that  "Bullitt  instructed  a  man 
to  try  and  get  a  place  appointed  for  him  to 
meet  Colonel  Jesse,  said  to  be  a  rebel  colonel  in 
command  of  the  rebel  forces  in  Kentucky;  and 
he  instructed  this  man  to  go  to  Colonel  Syph- 
ert,  a  rebel  colonel,  said  to  be  in  command  of 
a  rebel  squad,  and  have  a  conference  with  him 
about  the  capture  of  Louisville."  He  also 
states,  that  in  Kentucky,  "there  was  a  rebel 
Col.  Anderson,  of  the  3d  rebel  Kentucky  Regi 
ment  of  infantry,  initiated  into  the  order  about 
the  last  of  June,  1864,"  by  Kalfus;  and,  also, 
Captain  Van  Morgan,  Dick  Pratt,  Jim  McCrock- 
lin,  and  a  captain  of  a  squad  of  guerrillas. 

And  here  let  me  say,  that  all  that  has  been 
said  by  Mr.  Milligan's  counsel,  or  by  Mr.  Ray 
in  reference  to  Mr.  Stidger's  initiating,  or  as 
sisting  in  the  initiation  of  those  parties,  seems 
to  be  exceedingly  unjust  and  ill-timed.  It 
certainly  can  have  no  weight  with  this  Court, 
or  with  any  unbiased  mind.  Mr.  Stidger  un 
equivocally  states  that  all  he  did  in  the  way 
of  initiation  of  rebel  officers,  or  of  any  one 
else,  he  did  in  pursuance  of  instructions  from 
Judge  Bullitt,  the  head  of  the  order  in  Ken 
tucky,  or  Dr.  Kalfus.  or  upon  his  own  respon 
sibility.  He  does  not  state,  and  there  is  not 
one  particle»of  evidence  from  the  beginning 
of  this  trial  to  its  close,  to  support  the  allega 
tion,  that  he  ever  initiated  any  person  into 
this  order,  by  the  instruction,  direction  or 
sanction  of  General  Carrington,'  or  any  other 
officer  of  the  United  States,  or  of  the  State  of 
Indiana.  He  was  instructed  simply  to  become 
a  member  of  this  order,  and  learn  all  lie  could 
with  reference  to  its  acts  and  purposes.  It  i*» 
perfectly  absurd  to  claim  that  there  was  any 
desire  or  design  on  his  part,  or  on  the  part  of 
the  authorities,  to  extend  or  perpetuate  this 
order.  All  his  acts  were,  weekly  and  month 
ly,  reported  to  the  United  States  authorities. 
They  were  striving  to  obtain  that  degree  of 


278 


TREASON    TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


information  upon  which  they  could  act  in 
bringing  these  conspirators  to  justice;  and 
the  moment  they  gathered  sufficient  informa 
tion  to  base  their  action  upon,  the  authorities 
acted.  And  you,  gentlemen,  on  the  part  of 
the  accused,  at  one  moment  and  in  one  breath, 
are  bitter  beyond  degree,  in  denouncing  the 
authorities  because  they  did  not  act.  sooner; 
and  with  the  same  vigor,  and  in  the  next 
breath,  you  denounce  their  arrest,  finally,  as 
acts  of  tyranny,  unwarranted  and  unauthor 
ized. 

To  return  to  the  evidence.  Mr.  Ileffren  tes 
tifies,  that  the  revolution  on  the  10th  of  Aug 
ust  hinged  on  the  contingency  of  the  co-ope 
ration  of  the  rebels;  and  that  "about  the  10th 
of  August,  Dr.  Bowles  had  sent  a  man  to  Gen 
eral  Price,  but  he  had  not  returned."  Rebel  com 
munication  was  also  spoken  of  to  Heifren,  by 
Mr.  Harris,  of  Salem.  Wilson  says,  that  at 
the  Chicago  meeting  of  July  20th,  1864,  he 
heard  communication  with  the  rebels  spoken 
of.  He  says:  "I  think  Dr.  Bowles  said,  mes 
sengers  were  sent  to  the  rebels.  *  I  think 
they  were  sent  into  Kentucky  and  Mrssouri. 
*  *  I  inferred  it  [communication]  was  to  be 
with  Price  ami  Buckner,  because  they  were  to 
be  the  co-opuriitive  forces  in  case  of  an  upris 
ing."  "The  general  signal  for  the  uprising  was 
to  be  the  appearance  of  guerrillas  or  troops  in 
the  vicinity  of  St.  Louis  or  Louisville."  The 
couriers  sent,  "were  to  go  to  Generals  Price 
and  Buckner."  The  Illinois  forces  of  the  or 
der  were  to  liberate  rebel  prisoners  in  that 
State,  and  concentrate  at  St.  Louis,  "to  co-op 
erate  with  Price's  forces." 

Wilson  also  states  that  at  the  Chicago  meet 
ing,  Dodd  represented  that  he  came  fresh 
from  a  conference  with  Holcombe,  Clay  and 
Sanders,  at  Niagara  Falls,  who  were  duly  au 
thorized  by  the  Southern  Confederacy  to  meet 
them  in  Chicago,  but  could  not  get  a  safe  con 
duct,  through  Horace  Greeley,  from  the  Presi 
dent.  Yet  the  Southern  Confederacy  was  rep 
resented  by  a  Captain  Majors,  and  Mr.  Bar 
rett,  who  said  he  was  authorized  to  represent 
the  Southern  Confederacy. 

These  men  met,  according  to  their  own 
statement,  not  to  destroy  the  Government,  but 
to  save  it;  and  in  this  work  of  saving  the 
Government,  they  boasted  of  the  active  sym 
pathy  and  co-operation  of  the  rebel  authori 
ties,  who  have  always  maintained  the  distinct 
ive  principles  of  the  order. 

Mr.  Barrett,  of  Missouri,  in  opening  the 
conclave,  stated  "that  his  object  in  calling 
the  meeting  was  that  lie  thought  the  Govern 
ment  could  be  restored,  and  he  was  satisfied 
it  could  be,  if  we  could  get  the  co-operation 
of  the  North  with  the  South — or  a  portion  of 
the  North,  Ohio,  Indiana,  Illinois,  Missouri, 
and  Kentucky;  he  said  if  the  members  of  the 
Sons  of  Liberty  in  these  States,  would  co-op 
erate  with  the  South,  he  had  no  doubt  the  en 
tire  Government  could  be  saved  through  their 
action.  He  also  saicUhat  it  had  been  contem- 
platc'd  to  have  an  uprising  at  some  time  soon, 
perhaps  as  early  as  the  3d  of  August,  but 
that  had  failed  from  some  cause;  and  he 
thought  every  thing  could  be  got  ready  for  an 
uprising,  perhaps  by  the  10th  or  15th  of  the 


month,  and  that  the  South,  in  order  to  show 
her  Avillingness  to  engage  in  some  movement 
that  would  restore  the  Government,  had  au 
thorized  him  to  place  at  the  disposal  of  the 
members  of  the  organization  a  large  sum  of 
money,  amounting  to  two  millions  of  dollars. 
*  *  That  the  organization  could  have  the 
use  of  that  amount  of  money  in  preparing  * 
themselves  to  rise  against  the  Lincoln  Admin 
istration;  that  it  would  be  distributed  to  the 
several  Grand  Commanders  of  those  States, 
and  by  them  sub-distributed  among  such  per 
sons  inside  of  their  order  as  in  their  judgment 
was  prudent,  and  to  be  expended,  by  those 
who  received  it,  for  arms  and  other  appli 
ances  of  war. 

"lie  [Barrett]  stated,  in  speaking  of  the 
money,  that  it  had  been  used  for  the  purpose 
of  paying  for  the  destruction  of  United  States 
property,  arsenals,  burning  boats,"  etc.  "He 
said  they  would  pay  ten  per  cent,  on  Govern 
ment  property  so  destroyed." 

Dr.  Wilson  said  he  understood  from  some 
source,  he  thinks  from  Dr.  Bowles,  "that  Ohio 
was  to  be  taken  care  of  by  Vallandigham  * 
in  the  event  of  a  general  uprising.  He 
had  some  forces  at  his  disposal  in  Canada, 
and  would  bring  those  forces  into  Ohio  to  co 
operate  with  other  forces  at  Cincinnati  and 
Louisville." 

HOW    IT    WAS    TO    BE    DONE. 

I  come  next  to  the  consideration  of  the  rev 
olutionary  plot,  or  the  plan  finally  determined 
upon,  by  which  the  purposes  of  this  order 
were  to  be  carried  into  execution.  The  details 
of  the  plan  of  operations  matured  at  Chicago, 
in  July,  1804,  involving  the  release  of  the 
rebel  prisoners  in  Ohio,  Indiana,  and  Illinois, 
and  the  seizure  of  Government  arsenals,  and 
burning  of  Northern  cities,  etc.,  in  this  State, 
in  Missouri,  and  Kentucky,  were  detailed  sub 
stantially  alike  by  Harrison,  Stidger,  Bing- 
liam,  Wilson  and  Heifren.  Harrison  first 
speaks  of  it  as  "a  design  in  progress  or  in 
contemplation."  Dodd  desired  to  have  a  Dem 
ocratic  mass  meeting  called,  under  cover  of 
which  he  would  carry  out  his  plans.  If  the 
meeting  was  called,  Harrison  says,  "he  in 
tended  to  send  out  circulars  to  the  members 
of  the  order  in  the  various  counties,  ordering 
the  members  (not  the  military  members,  it 
should  be  borne  in  mind,  but  all  the  members)  , 
o  come  up  to  that  meeting  armed.''  *  *  "By 
the  aid  of  the  rebel  prisoners,  who  were  to  bo 
released  through  his  instrumentality,  and  that 
of  the  persons  who  came  in  here  to  the  meet 
ing  to  be  held  here  on  the  16th,  they  were  to 
have  an  uprising  and  overturn  the  State  Gov 
ernment." 

;'This  scheme  had  its  connection  not  only 
in  this  State,  but  in  the  State  of  Illinois." 
Harrison  also  stated  that  Dodd  was  the  proper 
person  to  head  the  uprising.  I  then  asked 
him: 

"  Q.  Had  he  the  power  in  an  official  capac 
ity  to  order  that  here? 

"A.  It  was  vested  entirely  in  Mr.  Dodd. 

"Q.  Had  he  the  power  to  order  members  of 
the  order  at  will? 

«  A.  He  had." 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


279 


Joseph  J.  Bingham,  in  his  testimony,  states 
that  when  Dodd  approached  him,  and  asked 
him  for  his  co-operation  in  this  scheme  of  rev 
olution,  August  2d,  he  (Dodd)  said  "  that  at 
the  Council,  a  revolution  had  been  determined 


upon. 


Arrangements   had  been  made 


to  release  the  prisoners  on  Johnson's  Island, 
at  Camp  Chase,  near  Columbus,  Ohio,  at  Camp 
Morton,  and  also  at  Camp  Douglas,  and  that 
the  prisoners  at  Camp  Douglas,  after  their  re 
lease,  were  to  go  over  and  release  those  at 
Rock  Island.  At  the  same  time  there  was  to 
be  an  uprising  at  Louisville,  at  which  the  Gov 
ernment,  stores,  etc.,  were  to  be  seized." 

This  scheme  Bingham  did  not  indorse,  but 
did  conceal.  He  did  go  to  Athon  and  Ristine, 
us  he  testifies,  and  asked  them  leading  ques 
tions,  and  learned  nothing,  and  revealed  noth 
ing.  Through  the  instrumentality  of  Mr. 
Kerr,  who  seemed  alone  faithful  to  his  country 
among  the  faithless,  a  conference  of  leading 
Democrats  was  held  to  arraign  Dodd  and 
Walker.  They  met  at  McDonald's  offifte.  Bing 
ham  says:  "Colonel  Walker  and  Dodd  did  not 
acknowledge  or  deny,  at  that  interview,  that 
any  such  scheme  was  entertained.  They  both 
spoke,  and  very  earnestly,  about  the  state  of 
public  affairs,  and  they  used  about  these  argu 
ments:  'That  the  Government  could  not  be  re 
stored  again  under  the  old  state  of  things, 
without  a  forcible  revolution.  That  an  appeal 
to  the  ballot-box  was  all  folly;  that  the  people 
were  prepared  for  revolution;  that  they  would 
not  submit  to  the  draft;-  and  that  it  was  bet 
ter  to  direct  the  revolution,  than  to  have  the 
revolution  direct  us.' " 

Every  member  of  that  meeting,  who  heard 
these  speeches  uttered  by  these  men,  was 
bomid,  if  he  acted  in  good  faith  to  his  country, 
to  have  had  these  men  instantly  arrested  and 
turned  over  to  the  authorities  to  be  punished. 
And  every  man  who  was  present  on  that  oc 
casion,  failed  in  his  duty  to  his  Government 
in  her  hour  of  s-orest  need,  when  he  permitted 
these  men  to  walk  abroad  maturing  their 
schemes  of  revolution,  of  insurrection  and 
treason,  or  permitted  in  his  hearing  the  utter 
ances  of  these  sentiments,  knowing  that  they 
had  already  matured  a  scheme  for  carrying 
them  into  execution. 

In  these  brief  speeches  of  W'alker  and 
Dodd,  as  given  by  Bingham,  is  outlined  the 
legitimate  culmination  of  the  cardinal  prin 
ciples  of  the  order.  The  order  had  never 
doubted  the  propriety  of  insurrection  and 
revolution,  but  only  whether  the  proper  time 
had  come  for  its  inauguration.  Walker  and 
Dodd  believed  that  period  had  arrived,  and 
they  acted  accordingly.  They  accepted  Bar 
rett's  offer  of  rebel  co-operation.  They  coun 
seled  withHolcombc,  Clay  and  Sanders,  at  Niag- 
ara  Falls,  while  maturing  and  arranging  the 
details  of  revolution.  They  admitted  into  their 
Chicago  conclave  of  July  20th,  representatives 
of  the  Southern  Confederacy.  They  appointed 
a  meeting  with  rebel  officers  in  this  city,  to 
arrange  the  details  of  releasing  rebel  pris 
oners. 

Bingham  says,  on  the  morning  of  the  llth 
of  August,  he  met  Walker  going  to  the  Bates 
House.  "I  asked  him  why  he  was  going? 


He  said  he  had  to  meet  these  gentlemen  by 
appointment.  I  understood  him  to  say  that 
they  were  rebel  officers.  *  *  He  said  that 
they  were  on  their  way  to  Chicago  to  take 
charge  of  the  rebel  prisoners  when  they  were 
released  from  Camp  Douglas.  It  was  neces 
sary  that  he  should  see  them  to  tell  them  that 
the  whole  scheme  was  stopped.  He  met  me 
afterward,  and  said  that  he  had  seen  them, 
and  they  had  gone  on  arid  stopped  all  ope 
rations  at  that  time  for  the  release  of  the 
prisoners." 

The  arrival,  of  the  rebel  colonels  at  tho 
Bates  House  here,  from  the  rebel  army,  is  most 
conclusive  proof  of  the  direct  communication 
and  connection  of  this  order  with  the  rebel 
insurgents.  But  twenty  days  elapsed  be 
tween  the  time  when  the  plan  is  agreed  upon 
at  Chicago,  before  that  intelligence  is  trans 
mitted  to  the  rebel  authorities,  and  in  pursu 
ance  of  that  intelligence  the  rebel  emissaries 
arrived  at  this  point  to  take  part  in  this  in 
surrection.  Their  couriers  must  have  been 
swift  and  sure. 

Stidger  says  that  on  the  29th  of  July,  he 
saw  Dodd,  and  Dodd  said  to  him:  "He  there 
fore  wished  me  to  go  home,  and  get  twenty  or 
thirty  good  runners,  so  that  as  soon  as  Judgo 
Bullitt,  returned  they  might  have  been  sent 
off.  He  said  the  programme  was  arranged, 
and  every  thing  ready."  Bullitt  also  told 
Stidger  that  "the  programme  was  all  arranged 
for  this  uprising."  On  the  2d  of  August, 
Stidger  says  Dodd  told  me  "what  the  pro 
gramme  was,  and  impressed  upon  me  the  im 
portance  of  secrecy." 

Stidger  also  learned  that  "their  differencs 
at  Chicago  was  whether  they  should  wait  un- 
!  til  the  rebel  forces  should  be  sent  into  Eastern 
Kentucky  to  eta-operate  with  them,  or  to  make 
their  uprising  now,  and  co-operate  with  tho 
rebel  forces  when  Davis  could  send  them.'1 
"  Bowles  at  first  objected  to  this  uprising  until 
the  rebels  should  invade  the  eastern  part  of 
the  State,  as  he  said  they  would.  *  *  Ho 
would  consent  to  the  uprising  on  the  loth  or 
10th  of  August,  as  Dodd  had  said,  provided 
Colonel  Syphert,  Colonel  Jesse,  and  Walker 
Taylor  would  assist  in  the  capture  of  Louis 
ville,  until  the  forces  of  this  State  could  get 
there." 

Piper  also  told  Stidger  that  "he  was  carry 
ing  orders,  or  that  he  had  orders  from  Mr. 
Vallandigham  to  Judge  Bullitt  and  Dr.  Bowles. 
They  were  orders  with  respect  to  the  time  set 
for  the  uprising  of  the  order." 

Bowles  also  said  to  Stidger,  that  the  pro 
gramme  Dodd  had  given  him,  "  was  the  pro 
gramme  agreed  on  at  Chicago." 

Heffren  confirms  the  statements  of  other 
witnesses  in  regard  to  this  scheme  of  revolu 
tion,  and  said  it  failed  partly  on  account  of 
Kerr's  exposure,  and  also,  "because  the  army 
of  the  Confederacy  did  not  come  through  Cum 
berland  Gap.  as  they  had  agreed  to,  or  as  it 
was  reported  they  had  agreed  to  do." 

The  revolutionary  purposes  of  the  order  were 
also  shown  in  the  speech  made  at  the  time  of 
the  Chicago  Convention,  August  29th,  18G4,  to 
the  conclave  of  the  Sons,  of  Liberty,  by  Mr. 
Moss,  of  Missouri.  After  describing  the  in- 


280 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


dignities  suffered  by  members  of  the  order,  in 
that  State,  he  said:  "If  this  organization  was 
worth  any  thing,  if  it  was  intended  to  be  effi 
cient  in  the  restoration  of  the  Government 
under  the  Constitution,  that  now  was  the  prop 
er  time  to  strike;  that  these  indignities  were 
unbearable;  that  if  they  had  the  true  Ameri 
can  blood  in  them,  they  would  not  bear  it  any 
longer,  but  would  strike  now." 

These,  then,  were  the  chief  schemes  and  pur 
poses  of  the  order,  as  explained  and  denned 
by  the  acts  of  its  members.  These  were  the 
means  by  which  they  pi-oposed  to  carry  their 
purposes  into  execution.  These,  in  brief,  are 
the  acts  done  in  pursuance  of  the  original 
combination;  and  the  culmination  of  all  these 
acts  on  the  day  assigned,  was  but  the  natural 
outgrowth,  the  proper  and  natural  consumma 
tion  of  the  principles  and  purposes  which  they 
had  sworn  to  maintain  by  force  of  arms,  if 
necessary.  I  therefore  say  that  each  member 
of  this  conspiracy,  who  took  upon  himself  the 
oaths  of  the  first,  second  and  third  degrees  of 
this  order,  or  of  the  first  degree  alone,  after 
fully  understanding  the  lessons  and  princi 
ples  of  the  order,  as  explained  in  the  Ritual, 
was  responsible  for  every  one  of  these  acts 


counsel  puts  Mr.  Bowles  before  the  public  as 
more  sinned  against  than  sinning.  This  view 
of  the  case  can  only  be  sustained  by  a  whole 
sale  rejection  of  the  testimony  of  witnesses  of 
undoubted  veracity.  While  Dr.  Bowles  has 
not  put  himself  forward  as  a  public  agitator, 
nor,  by  speeches  to  public  assemblies,  sought 
to  stir  up  insurrection  and  dissatisfaction,  he 
has,  however,  steadily  and  quietly,  in  the  daily 
walks  of  life,  in  the  order  and  in  connection 
with  it,  moved  forward  and  labored  to  secure 
the  overthrow  of  the  Government,  even  at  the 
expense  of  insurrection  and  revolution.  That 
he  spent  his  own  time  and  money  freely 
for  this  object,  there  is  no  doubt.  That  in  his 
old  age,  with  the  span  of  his  life  nearly  closed, 
he  leagued  himself  with  younger  men,  and 
assisted  them  in  their  schemes  of  treason,  is 
clearly  proven,  There  is  not,  however,  a  par 
ticle  of  evidence  to  show  that  his  object,  as 
claimed  by  his  counsel,  was  simply  to  effect  a 
compromise  between  the  two  sections.  All  his 
acts,  and  those  of  his  co-conspirators,  recog 
nize  the  rebels  as  friends  of  civil  liberty,  and 
his  and  their  friends;  and  the  Government, 
and  those  who  administered  it,  and  its  sup 
porters,  as  enemies  and  usurpers,  whom  he 
and  thev  hated  with  a  hatred  unutterable  and 


done  by  the  leaders  of  this  order.     There 

no  way  by  which  they  can  relieve  themselves  I  beyond  measure. 

from   that  responsibility.     They  must  be  held  |      With  these  cardinal  principles,  the  accused, 

accountable   for   these    acts.     They  were  but   William  A.  Bowles,  put  himself  in  communi- 

carrying  into  practical   application   the  theo-  cation,  and  acted  in  concert  with  those  whose 


ries  and  principles  they  had  all  sworn  to 
maintain.  This  organization,  as  a  body,  was 
the  gathering  together,  to  be  wielded  against 
the  Government,  of  all  the  bitter  and  hostile 
elements  in  these  Northern  States.  It  was 
truly  but  a  whited  scpulcher.  To  the  world  it 
exhibited  nothing  of  its  inner  corruption,  but 
concealed  its  acts,  principles  and  purposes. 
It  concealed  its  very  name,  its  very  existence; 
but  within  it  was  filled  with  dead  men's  bones, 
and  all  manner  of  corruption.  Over  the  doors 
of  its  temples  should  bo  inscribed  the  same 
maxim  that  the  Roman  people  used  as  to  their 
own  city,  in  the  days  of  the  Inquisition: 

«'  Vivere  q«i  sancte  vultis  disrcditc  Eoina, 
Omnia  hie  ease  lict'Ut  non  licet  ease  probuui." 

"He  who  would  live  holily,  depart  from  Rome: 
All  things  are  allowed  here  except  to  be  upright." 

All  things  were  allowed  in  these  temples, 
except  to  be  loyal,  true,  faithful  to  the  mother 
who  had  cherished  and  nourished  them:  that 
dearest  mother,  our  beloved  country. 

CONNECTION    OF    THE  ACCUSED  WITH    THIS    ORDER. 

I  now  turn  to  examine  briefly  the  evidence 
as  it  applies  to  the  accused  individually. 

WILLIAM    A.    BOWLES. 

First,  then,  in  the  order  of  their  arraign 
ment,  I  shall  consider  the  proof  as  it  relates 
to  the  accused,  William  A.  Bowles.  The  ar 
gument  of  Mr.  Ray,  the  able  counsel  for  Mr. 
Bowles  and  Mr.  Humphreys,  is  an  ingenious, 
courteous,  elegant  document.  I  think  it  puts 
the  evidence  in  the  best  possible  light  for  the 
defendants.  But  in  scanning  that  argument 
closely,  we  see  its  fallacies  and  its  objects 
•when  we  come  to  weigh  it  by  ihe  proof.  The 


iron  hands  were  grappling  at  the  throat  of  the 
Republic. 

The  testimony  shows  that  William  A.  Bowles 
was  initiated  into  the  Grand  Council  Degree 
of  the  Order,  on  the  10th  of  September,  1803. 
Mr.  Harrison  testifies  to  this  positively,  and 
identifies  the  accused,  William  A.  Bowles,  as 
the  person  initiated  that  day.  He  was  a  mem 
ber  of  the  Military  Committee  appointed  at 
that  time.  He  spoke  at  considerable  length 
on  the  features  of  ihe  military  bill.  His 
speech  was  "approving  of  the  military  bill." 
He  was  present  at  the  State  Council  held  Feb 
ruary  16th  and  17th,  1864.  The  same  witness 
testifies  that  Bowles  was  present,  and  was 
"elected  in  the  South-east  District"  as  its 
Major  General.  Wilson  testifies  that  Dr. 
Bowles  was  present  at  the  State  Council, 
which,  he  thinks,  was  held  about  the  6th  of 
November,  1863.  A  military  committee  was 
appointed  at  that  meeting.  Wilson  says:  '-I 
thought  from  the  actions  of  D*.  Bowles,  he 
must  be  the  chairman  of  that  committee,  as  he 
made  a  verbal  report."  This  was  the  meeting 
at  which  Dodd  proposed  "to  kick  down  the 
walls  of  common  decency,  and  talk  treason 
for  awhile;"  and  spoke  of  revolution  as  one 
of  the  ulterior  plans  of  the  organization,  if 
necessity  required  it.  Here,  then,  was  the  ex 
planation  of  the  intents  and  purposes  of  the 
order,  in  the  presence  of  the  accused,  boldly 
and  without  reserve,  to  the  assembled  mem 
bers  of  the  order,  moving  forward  to  its  ac 
complishment.  Supreme  Councils  were  held 
in  Chicago,  in  the  latter  part  of  September, 
1863,  and  in  New  York  in  October  or  Novem 
ber,  and  also  in  the  following  February. 

Harrison  said  he  understood  Bowles  was 
present  at  the  Supreme  Council  in  September, 


TREASON    TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


281 


and  adds:  "I  got  this  information  from  Dodd." 
Harrison  sent  to  Dr.  Bowles  two  copies  of  the 
printed  proceedings  of  the  February  Grand 
Council,  with  the  Constitution  of  the  County 
and  Branch  Temples.  He  says  that  Dr.  Bowles 
was  present  at  the  State  Council  of  June  14th, 
1864. 

The  military  bill  was  changed  in  the  Feb 
ruary  Council  at  Bowies'  suggestion.  Harri- 
Bon  says:  "He  was  elected  [Major  General] 
on  that  occasion.  A  portion  of  that  bill  was 
changed,  and  I  did  not  hear  him  object  after 
the  bill  was  changed." 

Heffren  states  that  he  made  a  change  in  the 
districts  defined  by  the  bill,  and  then  "Dr. 
Bowles  was  unanimously  elected  in  place  of 
McGrane." 

Mr.  Bingham,  another  witness  for  the  Gov 
ernment,  and  a  member  of  the  order,  testifies 
that  "Colonel  Bowles,  the  accused,"  was  pres 
ent  at  the  February  Council.  Also,  that  "about 
the  middle  of  May,  Dr.  Bowles,  Mr.  Dodd,  Judge 
Bullitt,  and  Barrett  were  at  my  office,  *  *  * 
and  supposed  that  they  were  all  members  of  the 
order."  Here  we  find  Dr.  Bowles  moving  about, 
and  in  close  communion  with  the  leading  and 
most  venomous  and  reckless  of  these  conspir 
ators.  The  Commission  will  recollect  another 
fact — that  this  assemblage  of  these  leading 
conspirators  here  was  in  May,  and,  also,  that 
it  was  in  May  of  the  same  year  that  the  lead 
ing  members  of  this  order  were  experimenting 
with  this  Greek  fire  in  the  basement  of  some 
building  in  your  city,  on  Sunday,  while  your 
citizens  were  attending  public  worship.  Un 
doubtedly  these  were  the  men  who  were  super 
intending  those  experiments. 

Bingham  testifies  that  Bowles  was  present  at 
Chicago;  that  Dodd  informed  him  that  Dr. 
Bowles  was  present  at  Chicago,  where  "a  rev 
olution  had  been  determined  upon." 

Stidger  says  that  in  his  interview  with 
Bowles,  "he  told  me  that  he  was  a  military 
chief  of  the  order.  *  *  He  said  that  the 
forces  of  Indiana  would  concentrate  in  Ken 
tucky,  and  make  Kentucky  their  battle-ground ; 
that  the  forces  in  Illinois  would  concentrate  in 
St.  Louis,  and  co-operate  with  the  forces  in 
Missouri;  that  Illinois  would  furnish  50,000, 
Missouri  30,000,  and  Price  was  to  invade  the 
State  with  20,000  men,  and  with  that  100,000 
men  they  were  to  hold  and  permanently  occupy 
that  State;  and  the  troops  of  Indiana  and  Ohio 
concentrate  at  Louisville. 

"He  wanted  to  know  how  many  men  Ken 
tucky  could  furnish,  and  stated  that  a  rebel 
force,  under  Buckner,  would  come  into  the 
eastern  part  of  the  State,  and  with  these  forces 
they  intended  to  hold  Kentucky. 

"He  told  me  that  this  order  was  made  out 
of  the  Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle,  of  which 
he  had  been  a  member;  and  that  he  resurrected 
this  order  out  of  it." 

Stidger  visited  Bowles  again  at  French  Lick 
Spriifgs,  on  the  28th  of  May.  In  that  inter 
view  Bowles  "repeated  again  his  revolution 
ary  programme  in  connection  with  Price  and 
Buckner." 

This  evidence  of  Mr.  Stidger  stands  unim- 
peached  and  uncontradicted;  and  I  here  ve'n- 
ture  to  say  that  no  witness  ever  came  upon  the 


witness-stand  and  testified  to  so  many  distinct 
facts,  dates,  places,  and  persons — every  word 
being  recorded  as  he  stated  it — that  has  been 
more  triumphantly  corroborated  by  all  the  dif 
ferent  witnesses  that  have  testified  than  Mr. 
Stidger.  While  every  effort  has  been  made  by 
the  defense  to  break  in  upon  the  strength  of 
his  testimony,  to  find  some  slight  variations 
upon  which  to  base  a  probability  of  mistake; 
yet  in  every  instance  the  subsequent  proof, 
and  the  investigation  of  the  facts,  have  all 
shown  that  Stidger  was  exactly  right,  and 
truthful,  and  triumphantly  illustrates  the  old 
adage,  "Truth  is  ever  consistent." 

Stidger  goes  on  to  say  that,  at  this  same  time, 
"He  [Bowles]  also  told  me  of  the  change  in  the 
Supreme  Commander  to  Vallandigham,  arid 
that  he  had  been  appointed  a  commissioner  to 
visit  Vallandigham  in  Canada." 

"Also,  that  Bowles  stated  to  him,  at  the  same 
interview,  that  on  Sunday,  May  22,  himself, 
Dodd,  and  a  Dutch  chemist,  experimented  with 
Greek  fire,  at  Indianapolis,  and  that  they  had 
nearly  brought  it  to  perfection,  and  that  Bullitt 
knew  how  it  was  made.  That  they  intended 
to  use  it  for  the  destruction  of  Government 
property;  that  the  Jeff  Davis  government  was 
to  pay  them  ten  per  cent,  for  all  the  property 
destroyed,  taking  the  estimate,  as  given  in  the 
Northern  papers,  of  the  amount  destroyed.  He 
also  told  me  that  the  two  boats  burned  at  the 
Louisville  wharf,  last  spring,  and  boats  belong 
ing  to  the  Government,  that  had  been  destroyed 
on  the  Mississippi  river  and  elsewhere,  had 
been  burned  by  the  Greek  fire." 

Here  again  is  a  singular  corroboration  of 
Stidger's  testimony.  Wilson  testifies  that  Bar 
rett  stated  to  the  members  of  the  order,  at 
Chicago,  that  he  was  expressly  authorized  by 
the  rebel  government  to  pay  this  ten  per  cent, 
for  the  destruction  of  Government  property. 
It  can  not  be  claimed  that  there  was  any  col 
lusion  between  Stidger  and  Dr.  Wilson;  tho 
fact  is,  they  have  never  met. 

On  the  28th  of  June,  1864,  Booking  exhibited 
his  conical  shell,  and  a  diagram  of  the  spher 
ical  shell,  and  explained  the  principle  of  the 
two:  Bowles  was  present.  About  the  1st  of 
June,  "Bullitt  and  others  met  at  Kalfus'  office, 
in  Louisville,  and  decided  that  Coffin  should 
be  murdered."  They  sent,  by  Stidger,  a  mes 
sage  to  Bowles  to  see  that  it  was  done;  it  was 
delivered,  and  Bowles  said,  "I  will  put  two 
men  on  his  track."  Stidger  testifies  that,  at  a 
meeting  of  the  State  Council,  held  on  the  14th 
of  June,  1864,  at  which  Bowles  was  present,  a 
committee  on  military  affairs  was  appointed; 
and  that  "Milligan,  Bowles,  McBride,  and  Dr. 
Gatling,  were  four  of  the  military  committee. 
*  *  *  They  reported  a  bill  setting  forth 
their  views  that  the  order  ought  to  be  organ 
ized  as  a  military  organization  at  once,  and 
armed."  He  testifies  further,  that  the  listvof 
Major  Generals  was  called  over,  including 
Bowles,  as  "the  major-generals,  by  virtue  of 
their  rank,  were,  ex  officio,  members  of  the  Su 
preme  Council."  The  day  after  the  Council, 
June  15,  Bowles,  Dodd,  and  Milligan  went  to 
Hamilton,  Ohio,  to  receive  an  exiled  enemy  of 
his  country,  the  Supreme  Commander  of  the 
Sons  of  Liberty,  C.  L.  Vallandigham.  Bowles 


282 


TREASON    TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


Stated  in  the  Council,  on  the  14th  of  June,  as 
Stidger  testifies,  that  he  had  "a  military  organ 
ization  "  in  his  county,  of  900  men,  armed  and 
equipped;"  and  "that  he  had  an  arrangement 
with  a  man  to  furnish  any  number  or  kind  of 
arms."  At  another  time  he  stated  to  Stidger 
that  "they  [the  order]  would  go  to  Kentucky 
and  have  a  regular  understanding  with  the 
Confederates,  and  act  in  concert  with  them; 
and  that  they  had  sent  a  man  named  Dickerson 
to  Richmond,  to  have  the  Confederate  authori 
ties  send  an  invading  force  to  act  in  concert 
with  their  order." 

In  one  of  the  last  interviews  between  Stidger 
and  Bowles,  the  question  of  revolution  was 
freely  discussed.  Stidger  gays:  "Bowles  at 
first  objected  to  this  uprising  until  the  rebels 
should  invade  the  eastern  part  of  the  State,  as 
he  said  they  would.  *  *  *  *  Bowles  said 
he  would  consent  to  the  uprising  on  the  15th 
or  16th  of  August,  as  Dodd  had  said,  provided 
Colonel  Syphert,  Colonel  Jesse,  and  Walker 
Taylor  would  assist  in  the  capture  of  Louis 
ville,  until  the  forces  in  this  State  could  get 
there."  "Bowles  asked  me  [Stidger]  if  I  could 
have  three  or  four  thousand  lances  made;  .... 
he  wanted  three  or  four  thousand  men  armed 
with  lances  and  revolvers;  he  said  he  could 

make  them  of  good  service He  told  me 

that  he  had  spent  $2,000  ....  for  the  benefit 
of  the  order; "  and  that  "he  cared  nothing 
about  the  election;  he  was  satisfied  Lincoln 
would  be  elected;  he  wanted  the  time  spent  in 
perfecting  the  organization,  and  getting  ready 
for  the  uprising." 

Piper  stated  to  Stidger  that  Bowles  had 
charge  of  the  release  of  the  rebel  prisoners  at 
Johnson's  Island,  or  Rock  Island.  This  Piper 
represented  himself  as  having  "an  appoint 
ment  on  Vallandigham's  staff;  he  said  that  he 
was  carrying  orders,  or  that  he  had  orders 
from  Mr.  Vallandigham  to  Judge  Bullitt  and 
Dr.  Bowles.  *  *  They  were  orders  as  to  the 
time  set  for  the  uprising  of  the  order."  Bowles 
told  Stidger,  "we  "  had  sent  Booking  to  Canada, 
"before  he  was  admitted  into  the  order,  to  see 
if  he  was  willing  to  spend  his  money  in  exper 
imenting  for  the  benefit  of  the  Order  of  Sons 
of  Liberty."  This  experimenting  was  to  bring 
to  greater  destructive  perfection  those  shells, 
and  Booking's  Greek  fire.  Stidger  visited 
Bowles  about  the  6th  of  August,  after  he  had 
obtained  the  pi-ogramme  from  Dodd,  and  he 
says:  "I  told  him  the  programme  as  Dodd 
had  given  it  to  me;  and  he  said  that  was  the 
programme  agreed  on  at  Chicago,  and  that 
Dodd  had  no  right  to  change  it;  that  they 
should  have  waited  the  action  of  the  rebel 
forces;  but  finally,  he  had  determined  he  would 
act  without  the  co-operation  of  the  rebel  forces, 
if  he  could  get  the  co-operation  of  three  rebel 
colonels." 

Heffren  testifies  that  James  B.  Wilson,  a 
member  of  the  order,  showed  him,  last  sum 
mer,  $1,000,  and  remarked,  "There  was  one 
thousand  he  had  just  got  from  Dr.  Bowles  to 
procure  arms  and  ammunition  for  our  county;" 
that  Dodd  and  Walker  had  received  $100,000 
each,  and  "a  portion  of  it  was  to  go  to  Dr. 
Bowles,  to  be  spent  in  his  part  of  the  State  in 
purchasing  arms  and  ammunition."  These 


arms  were  to  be  used  for  arming  the  order. 
He  adds,  that  the  military  objects  were  dis 
cussed  by  some  members  at  a  State  Council, 
in  February,  1864,  and  that  "Dr.  Bowles  was 
probably  there  one  morning  when  we  talked 
about  it."  He  says  Wilson  told  him  "that 
Bowles  had  made  an  arrangement  to  have 
nine  companies  of  infantry,  one  of  lancers, 
and  one  section  of  artillery,  to  comprise  each 
regiment  in  this  order."  Wilson  also  stated 
to  Heffren  that  "about  the  16th  of  August,  Dr. 
Bowles  had  sent  a  man  to  see  General  Price, 
but  he  had  not  returned.  *  *  *  *  Dr. 
Wilson  said  Dr.  Bowies'  man  had  gone  to  see 
Price,  and  another  to  Richmond,  to  arrange 
for  troops  to  come  through  Cumberland  Gap, 
and  when  they  returned,  which  they  expected 
would  be  before  the  16th  of  August,  1864,  this 
uprising  would  take  place." 

The  cross-examination  of  Heffren  develops 
the  fact  that  Dr.  Bowles  was  the  ranking  ma 
jor-general  of  the  order  in  this  State,  and 
that  Dodd  stated  at  the  February  meeting 
'•that  Dr.  Bowles  was  boss  of  the  whole  ma 
chine  of  the  military  part  of  the  order." 

James  B.  Wilson,  to  whom  I  have  heretofore 
referred — a  man  whose  candid  bearing,  delib 
eration,  and  evident  reluctance  to  testify, 
must  have  convinced  every  one  who  heard 
him,  of  the  unvarnished  truth  of  every  word 
he  uttered;  who  overstated  nothing,  and  only 
stated  that  which  he  was  compelled  to  by  his 
oath  and  the  direct  questions  propounded  to 
him — testifies  that  lie  attended  the  Chicago 
conclave  of  July  20,  which  Mr.  Barrett,  of 
Missouri,  said  "was  to  be  composed  of  the 
military  men  of  the  order."  Bullitt,  of  Ken 
tucky,  Barrett,  of  Missouri,  Piper,  of  Illinois, 
and  Dodd  and  Bowles,  of  this  State,  were 
there.  Barrett  made  a  speech,  in  which  he 
unfolded  the  programme  of  the  revolution, 
and  asked  the  co-operation  of  the  order  in 
Ohio,  Indiana,  Illinois,  Missouri,  and  Ken 
tucky,  with  the  South;  and  in  the  name  of 
the  South,  tendered  $2,000,000  to  arm  the 
order,  and  pay  for  the  destruction  of  Gov 
ernment  property.  He  referred  to  the  de 
struction  of  Government  property  at  Loxiis- 
ville,  St.  Louis,  and  on  the  Ohio  river,  on 
which  the  ten  per  cent,  premium  had  been 
paid.  The  witness  adds:  "I  afterward  learned 
from  Dr.  Bowles  that  the  means  employed  was 
Greek  fire." 

Both  Wilson  and  Heffren  testify  to  a  signal 
flag  to  be  used  by  the  order,  in  case  of  a  rebel 
invasion,  to  protect  property,  which  was  men 
tioned  by  Bowles  to  Dr.  Wilson. 

To  gain  admittance  for  Wilson  and  Greene 
into  the  Chicago  conclave,  Bowles  reported 
them  on  his  staff. 

Stidger  testifies  that  the  contingency  on 
which  Bowles  placed  the  revolution,  and  his 
willingness  that  it  should  take  place,  was  the 
co-operation  of  the  rebels.  Communication 
with  rebels  was  spoken  of  at  Chicago. 

Wilson  says:  "I  think  Dr.  BoAvles  said  mes 
sengers  were  sent  to  the  rebels.  *  *  *  1 
think  they  were  sent  into  Kentucky  and  Mis 
souri;  *"  *  I  inferred  it  was  to  be  with 
Price  and  Buckner,  because  they  were  to  be 
co-operating  forces  in  case  of  an  uprising. 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


283 


*  #  *  The  forces  of  Southern  Indiana  were 
to  be  rendezvoused  at  a  place  some  eight  or 
ten  miles  from  New  Albany.  '•  *  It  was 

expected  they  would  be  under  Dr.  Bowles.'' 

Wilson  further  says:  "I  was  furnished  with 
$1,000  by  Dr.  Bowles  for  the  purchase  of  arms 
for  those  of  the  order  who  were  understood  to 
be  unable  to  purchase  arms  themselves.  *  * 
I  went  to  Mr.  Kent,  of  New  Albany,  to  see 
about  the  purchase  of  arms." 

11.  C.  Bocking,  now  in  prison,  and  awaiting 
his  trial — the  only  witness  introduced  in  be 
half  of  the  accused,  Wm.  A.Bowles — testified, 
when  put  upon  the  stand  by  the  defense,  that 
Bowles  "asked  me  if  I  would  show  him  and 
his  friends  some  of  the  shells  and  the  Greek 
fire;  I  told  him  yes.  *  *  *  *  Dr.  Bowles 
aaid  he  would  see  some  of  his  friends,  and  see 
if  something  might  not  be  done  so  that  I  might 
get  along  with  the  shells."  The  result  was 
that  Bocking  received  $200  from  Bowles,  or 
through  his  agency. 

Gentlemen  of  the  Commission,  I  have  no 
comments  to  make  upon  this  testimony.  I 
leave  it  to  you  in  all  its  naked  force.  I  have 
extracted  and  collated  the  evidence  in  refer 
ence  to  this  accused,  and  I  present  the  results 
of  my  examination,  verbatim,  as  it  appears 
upon  the  record.  I  leave  the  evidence  thus 
presented,  to  answer  the  truly  beautiful  and 
sympathetic  appeal  of  his  counsel,  Mr.  Ray. 
It  is  with  as  deep  sorrow  and  heart-felt  regret 
as  the  counsel  himself  can  feel,  that  I  submit 
this  conclusive  record  against  this  white- 
haired  old  man.  I  look  upon  him  and  the 
crimes  he  has  committed,  and  those  he  has 
contemplated  against  his  country,  against  the 
generations  that  are  to  come  after  him — and 
my  heart  bleeds  that  designs  so  foul  and  un 
natural  should  ever  have  existed  in  any  hu 
man  heart.  I  pity  him.  I  pity  him  that  he 
was  so  constituted,  or  has  so  corrupted  the 
spirit  with  which  God  endowed  him,  as  to  be 
capable  of  such  crimes.  I  pity  him  that  his 
immortal  soul — that  spark  of  omniscience — 
should  enter  upon  its  new  life  in  the  unknown 
spirit  land,  loaded  with  such  infamy  and  deg 
radation;  but  while  I  have  sympathy  and  pity 
for  the  man,  for  what  he  must  suffer  in  case 
of  conviction,  I  look  about  me- and  over  this 
wide-spread  and  once  beautiful  and  peaceful 
land,  and  I  see  patriots  with  whitened  locks, 
and  millions  of  defenseless  women  and  little 
children,  with  outstretched  hands,  appealing 
to  Almighty  God  for  protection  from  the  trea 
son  that  would  plot,  and  the  traitors  who 
would  destroy — from  the  rebels  who,  with  tire 
and  sword,  would  bring  desolation  upon  all 
our  fair  land — from  the  wicked  and  misguided 
men  who  have  caused  a  wail  of  anguish  and 
bereavement  to  ascend  from  almost  every 
hearth — from  those  who  have  sent  the  maimed, 
the  crippled,  and  the  suffering  remnants,  of 
once  vigorous  manhood  to  sit  ever  by  your 
firesides,  to  be  met  ever  upon  your  streets — and 
from  all  who,  from  weakness  or  wickedness, 
have  aided  and  abetted  this  monstrous  con 
spiracy.  I  say  that  while  I  look  with  pity 
upon  the  man,  and  upon  his  unfortunate  con 
dition,  there  is  a  broader  sympathy  and  a 
broader  duty  that  would  lead  me  to  sympa 


thize  with  the  suffering  that  he  and  such  as 
he  have  caused,  and  that  he  and  such  as  he 
must  cause,  if  permitted  to  live  and  move  for 
ward  in  this  work  of  treason,  destruction, 
desolation  and  death. 

LAMBDIN    P.    MILLIGAN. 

It  seems  to  be  admitted  by  the  counsel  for 
the  accused  that  Mr.  Milligan  was  a  member 
(of  the  order,  and  had  attended  the  Grand 
Council,  arid,  therefore,  a  third  degree  mem 
ber;  also,  that  he  received  the  appointment  of 
major-general.  Upon  these  points  there  is  no 
difference  of  opinion. 

Samuel  F.  Day  Destines  that  Milligan  was 
present  at  the  Grand  Council  here  in  Septem 
ber,  and  states  that  he  made  some  remarks  to 
their  lodge  after  his  return.  This  Grand 
Council  is  the  one  at  which  the  military  bill 
was  adopted,  and  the  major-generals  elected. 
Mr.  Harrison  testifies  as  to  the  appointments 
of  the  major-generals  at  that  meeting.  Har 
rison  thinks  Milligan  was  absent  from  one  of 
the  State  Councils,  and  thinks  it  that  held  on 
the  16th  and  17th  of  February,  1864.  After 
naming  delegates  elected  at  the  September 
State  Council  to  the  Supreme  Council,  Har 
rison  says:  "Milligan  was  elected  a  delegate 
to  the  Supreme  Council.  I  understood  Dodd 
that  Milligan  was  present  at  the  Supreme 
Council  held  at  Chicago  or  New  York.  "•'••  * 
The  first  meeting  was  held  in  Chicago  in  the 
latter  part  of  the  month  of  September,  1863." 

Here,  we  see  in  the  very  opening  of  the  evi 
dence  that  Mr.  Milligan  was  one  of  the  prime 
movers,  one  of  the  main  spirits  in  this  organ 
ization  as  far  back  as  September,  1863.  At 
that  time  Mr.  Milligan  was  a  prominent  leader 
of  the  radical  peace  wing  of  the  Democratic 
party — that  part  of  the  Democratic  party  so 
frequently  charged  with  affiliation  and  sym 
pathy  with  rebels  and  traitors.  For  the 
Court  to  understand  exactly  Mr.  Milligan's 
position  in  the  order,  his  sentiments  in  join 
ing  it,  and  what  would  be  his  position  to 
ward  the  Government,  separate  and  apart 
from  the  order,  they  must  understand  his 
position  at  the  beginning  of  his  connection 
with  it. 

The  evidence  of  Mr.  Milligan's  friends,  the 
witnesses  he  has  introduced  upon  the  stand, 
have  been  harmonious  upon  this  one  fact, 
that  Mr.  Milligan  was  a  bitter  partisan,  a 
hater  of  the  Administration,  and  a  leader  of 
the  ultra  peace  wing  of  the  Democratic  party. 
He  then  enters  this  organization,  that  har 
monizes  with  his  own  sentiments,  with  his  pe 
culiar  views  as  to  State  rights,  State  sover 
eignty,  the  usurpations  of  the  Administration 
and  the  different  departments  of  the  Govern 
ment,  and  the  unconstitutionality  of  the  war, 
and  whose  members  are  the  bitter  opponents 
of  all  the  measures  to  aid  in  efficiently  car 
rying  forward  that  war. 

In  considering  this  evidence,  gentlemen,  wo 
must  look  into  the  surroundings  of  the  men, 
and  the  circumstances  of  the  country  at  that 
time.  Did  Mr.  Milligan,  with  these  political 
views,  and  his  undoubted  ability,  enter  this 
order  as  one  likely  to  hold  back  from  any  of 
the  purposes  enunciated  in  the  ritual  or  the 


284 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


obligation,  or  from  any  of  the  schemes  advo-j  testified  to  by  different  witnesses,  and  not 
cated  by  any  of  the  leaders  of  the  order,  as  contradicted  by  any,  whether  he  could  have 
shown  by  the  proof?  Were  not  all  these  sen-  come  up  to  the  November  Council,  and  taken 
timents  of  the  order  exactly  in  consonance  part  in  that  meeting,  where  all  the  interests 


with  the  opinions  and  principles  entertained 
by  Mr.  Milligan  himself?  Indeed,  the  princi 
ples  of  the  order  are  so  much  like  him,  that 
to  him  might  almost  be  credited  their  paternity. 
With  the  views  which  he  originally  held,  and 
the  principles  of  the  order,  to  which  he  as 
sented,  and  which,  with  his  intelligence,  he 
could  not  have  failed  to  understand,  with  his 
nerve  and  daring,  is  he  not  exactly  the  man 
to  have  undertaken  to  put  into  practical  oper 
ation  the  theories  which  he  and  they  held? 

The  only  question  now,  in  considering  the 
evidence,  is  to  find  the  degree  of  guilt  of  the 
accused.  That  they  are  all  guilty  is  estab 
lished  the  moment  you  prove  that  they  are 


and  purposes  of  the  order  were  discussed, 
without  being  notified  of  such  appointment. 
Is  it  reasonable,  or  rational,  to  believe  that 
he  could?  He  was  elected  by  the  delegates 
from,  the  district  represented;  his  election 
must  have  been  known  to  all  those  delegates, 
and  would  not  some  one  of  them  have  apprised 
Mr.  Milligan  of  his  appointment?  He  held 
one  of  the  four  highest  offices  of  the  order 
in  this  State.  Mr.  Bingham  also  testifies  that 
Mr.  Milligan  wras  present  at  this  November 
Council. 

Thus  it  is  established  beyond  question,  that 
Milligan  was  present  at  this  meeting;  it  is 
not  denied  by  the  defense.  I  now  desire  to 


members  of  the  order;  that  they  have  assented  |  call  the  attention  of  the  Court  particularly  to 


to  the  principles  and  taken  the  obligation  of 
the  order.  The  plea  of  ignorance,  of  want  of 
knowledge,  and  want  of  assent  on  the  part  of 
the  counsel  for  Mr.  Milligan,  will  not  suffice 
in  the  case  of  a  man  of  Mr.  Milligan's  nerve, 
energy,  and  intelligence.  It  is  asking  this 


what  treason  it  was,  as  sworn  to  by  Wilson, 
that  Dodd   talked   at  this  meeting,  at  which 


Milligan   was    present.      Wilson    says: 


He 


[Dodd]  stated  if  the  purposes 'of  this  order 
could  not  be  carried  out,  as  explained  by  Mr. 
Wright,  there  were  other  plans  that  could  be 


Court  to  believe  an  unreasonable  thing,  to  ask  |  resorted  to.  They  could  very  easily,  if  their 
them  to  believe  that  this  man  would  enter  into  j  organization  was  completed,  take  possession 
any  organization,  ascend  to  its  highest  de- |  of  the  railroads,  cut  the  telegraph  wires,  and 


grecs,  and  be  endowed  with  its  highest  honors, 
without  studying  thoroughly  the  cardinal 
principles  upon  which  it  was  based.  An  igno 
rant  man  might;  an  intelligent  man  never 
would. 

Let  us  briefly  glance  at  the  testimony  to  see 
what  are  the  facts  in  regard  to  Mr.  Milligan's 
co-operation  with  the  leaders  of  the  order,  in 


carrying  into  execution   its  purposes 


It  has 


throw  in.  at  one  time,  troops  enough  at  the 
capital  to  take  the  State  Government,  and 
have  things  their  own  way."  Here  was  the 
scheme  for  the  uprising,  the  insurrection,  laid 
down  to  the  members  of  this  order,  as  early 
as  November,  1863 — the  same  scheme,  substan 
tially,  that  was  agreed  upon  in  Chicago,  to  be 
carried  out  on  the  16th  of  August,  18iM.  If 
Milligan  was  present  at  this  November  meet- 


been  denied  that  Mr.  Milligan  ever  accepted  I  ing,  of  which  there  is  no  doubt,  then   he  did 
the  position  of  a  major-general  in  this  order,  ' 
or  that  there  was  any  proof  to  show  that  he 


know  that  these  were  the  ultimate  treasonable 
purposes  of  the  order.  The  plea  of  want  of 
knowledge  will  not  avail;  it  is  contrary  to 
reason,  and  directly  contradicted  by  the  evi 
dence. 

The  testimony  of  Samuel  F.  Winters,  a  wit 
ness  for  the  accused,  is  that  Mr.  Milligau  was 
not  present  at  the  State  Council  of  February 
16  and  17,  1804,  as  he  brought  down,  for  Mr. 
Milligan,  a  packet  of  resolutions,  which  were 
afterward  adopted  as  part  of  the  platform  of 
the  order.  Mr.  Harrison  testifies,  that  at  this 
meeting  the  annual  election  of  officers  took 
place,  and  that  Mr.  Milligan  was  elected  a 
major-general  of  the  order  in  his  district. 
Some  weeks  after,  when  the  new  ritual  was  • 
printed,  Harrison,  as  Grand  Secretary,  sent  to 
each  branch  temple  notice  of  the  change,  and 
copies  of  the  proceedings  of  the  State  Council, 
and  says  that  the  package  for  Huntingtoii 
county  he  directed  to  Mr.  Milligan. 

Mr.  Milligan  was  present  at  the  Council  of 
June  14,  as  Harrison,  Stidger,  and  Ibach  tes 
tify;  and  if  Mr.  Ibach,  who  is  relied  upon 
fully  by  the  counsel  in  his  argument  for  Mr. 
Milligan,  is  correct,  in  testifying  that  Mr. 
Milligan  was  not  present  as  a  delegate  from 
Iluntington  temple,  lie  must  have  been  there 

'and  talk  treason  for  awhile.'  "     I  would  call  j  by  virtue  of  his   military  position;  and    this- 
the    attention  of  the  Court  to    the    fact   that   idea  would  seem  to  be  favored  by  Section  3  of 


had  any  knowledge  that  such  an  appointment 
had  been  made.  On  the  cross-examination  of 
Harrison,  his  attention  was  particularly  called 
to  the  presence  of  Mr.  Milligan,  at  the  Septem- 
,ber  meeting,  during  that  part  of  the  session 
when  the  military  bill  was  discussed,  and  he 
answers,  "I  can  not  say  positively  whether  he 
was." 

Elliot  Robertson,  of  Randolph  county,  testi 
fies  that  Nathan  Brown  was  a  delegate  from 
their  lodge  to  Indianapolis,  in  September. 
1863;  on  his  return  he  "spoke  of  the  State 
being  divided  into  four  military  districts,  and 
that  a  man  by  the  name  o-f  Milligan  com 
manded  our  district."  Mr.  Harrison  testifies 
that  at  the  State  Council,  of  November,  1863, 
Mr.  Milligan  was  present.  At  this  meeting, 
Mr.  Harrison  testifies,  nothing  was  said  about 
the  object  of  the  military  organization,  "ex 
cept*  that  it  was  necessary  to  organize  in  a 
military  capacity  to  protect  the  rights  of  the 
members  against  the  encroachments  of  the 
Administration."  Toward  the  close  of  the 
November  Council,  Dr.  Wilson  testifies  that 
Dodd  said  "that  he  'would  kick  down  the 
walls  of  common  decency/  or  some  such  words, 


supposing   Mr.  Milligan   had   been   elected   a 
major-general  of  the  order,  in  September,  as 


Article  2  of  the   Constitution   of  the    Grand 
Council,  which  says:     "The  members  of  the 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


285 


Grand  Commander's  staff,  and  all  military 
officers  above  the  rank  of  colonel,  shall  be  ex 
ojficio  members  of  this  Grand  Council,  and 
entitled  to  the  sign  and  to  participation  in  its 
deliberations."  Thus,  gentlemen,  by  your  own 
witnesses,  you  have  Mr.  Milligan  present  at 
this  council  by  virtue  of  being  major-general 
of  this  order;  lie  is  here  exercising  the  func 
tions  of  his  office. 

Mr.  Harrison,  the  Grand  Secretary  of  the 
order,  says:  "No  person,  to  my  knowledge, 
ever  entered  the  Grand  Council,  who  was  not 
a  member."  Stidger  testifies  that  Milligan 
was  present  when  Bowles  reported  that  "he 
had  900  men  in  his  county,  organized,  armed, 
and  equipped;"  also,  that,  "in  the  afternoon, 
the  list  of  major-generals  was  called;"  "I  do 
not,  remember  that  he  [Milligan]  made  any 
particular  response."  *  *  *  "The  list,  of 
major-generals  was  called  in  this  way,  they 
being  ex  ojficio  delegates  to  the  Supreme  Coun 
cil.  Milligan  made  no  objection  to  going  that 
I  heard."  Also,  that  on  the  15th,  in  pursuance 
of  a  resolution  of  Council,  Milligan  went  to 
Hamilton,  with  Bowles  and  Dodd,  to  welcome 
Vallandigham.  Here  were  the  three  high  dig 
nitaries  of  the  order  going  over  to  Hamilton, 
to  welcome,  in  the  name  of  the  traitors  of  In 
diana,  this  returning  exile.  Can  it  be  claimed, 
with  any  show  of  reason,  that  Dodd  went  there 
as  Grand  Commander,  Bowles  as  Major  Gen 
eral,  and  Milligan  only  as  a  private  member 
of  the  order?  Is  it  not  more  reasonable  to 
suppose  that  that  Council  sent  three  of  the 
most  prominent,  influential  men,  and  the 
highest  officers  of  the  order? 

Among  the  leading  men  of  the  order  sum 
moned  by  Dodd  to  attend  a  consultation  on 
Tuesday,  August  2d,  in  relation  to  the  revolu 
tion,  Mr.  Harrison  testifies  that  Mr.  Milligan 
was  included.  He  says:  "Mr.  Dodd  informed 
me  that  he  intended  sending  for  Mr.  Milligan, 
for  Dr.  Bowles,  Mr.  Humphreys,  and  Dr.  Yea- 
kle.  *  *  I  went  to  Mr.  Milligan." 

"Q.  Did  you  see  him? 

"A.  I  did. 

"Q.  Did  you  tell  him  your  message? 
!A.  I  did. 

[Q.  What  did  he  say? 

'A.  He  srfid  he  did  not  know  whether  he 
could  be  present,  but  would  try  to  be." 

Here  was  the  Grand  Commander  summon 
ing  his  military  chieftains  about  him,  to  have 
a  council  of  war,  to  when  and  how  they  should 
put  their  forces  into  the  field.  The  object  of 
this  meeting  or  council  of  war,  as  stated  by 
Dodd  to  Stidger,  was  to  set  the  time,  the  exact 
day,  on  which  the  revolution  should  take 
place,  in  this  State.  Stidger  states  that  Dodd 
showed  and  read  to  him,  about  the  2d  of  Aug 
ust,  letters  from  two  or  three  gentlemen;  that 
Docld's  "idea  was  to  go  ahead  on  the  15th  or 
loth  of  August,  and  these  letters  from  these 
men  agreed  with  -him.  :  *  He  had  sent 
them  word,  and  they  did  not  come." 

It  becomes  a  matter  of  inquiry  here,  who 
these  letters  were  probably  from.  They  were 
certainly  from  persons  to  whom  Dodd  had  im 
parted  his  scheme.  The  evidence  justifies 
this  conclusion.  Now,  who  in  this  State  did 
he  probably  impart  tbpfc  scheme  to,  either  by 


letter  or  in  person?  Certainly  not  to  more 
than  those  whom  he  summoned  to  consult  with 
him.  Those  persons  he  summoned  for  consul 
tation,  were  all  Major  Generals  in  the  order, 
or  had  held  that  position.  Those  who  did  not 
come,  knowing  the  importance  of  this  meet 
ing,  as  they  must  have  known  of  Dodd  and 
Bowies'  trip  to  Chicago  and  the  plan  agreed 
on  there,  undoubtedly  wrote  to  Dodd,  cither 
assenting  to  or  dissenting  from  his  going  for 
ward  with  his  scheme  of  revolution.  Then 
the  conclusion  is  inevitable,  that  Milligan,  af 
ter  he  was  sent  to  as  one  of  those  parties  for 
consultation,  must  have  either  come  in  per 
son,  or  have  written  to  Dodd.  If  he  wrote  to 
Dodd,  then  no  doubt  he  indorsed  his  scheme; 
for  it  is  proven  that  these  letters  from  those 
who  did  not  come,  agreed  with  him  in  his  pro 
posed  uprising  on  the  16th. 

It  is  not  to  be  presumed  by  this  Court,  that 
Dodd,  with  all  the  hair-brained  fanaticism 
that  is  claimed  against  him  now,  by  his  then 
co-workers,  fast  friends  and  associates,  would 
have  dreamed  of  going  ahead  with  this  revo 
lution  without  the  assent  of  his  military 
chieftains.  The  prominent  members  of  the 
order  knew  who  were  Major  Generals,  who 
were  to  command  them;  and  if  those  Major 
Generals  held  back,  here  was  mutiny  and  in 
surrection  in  their  own  camp,  that  would 
have  defeated  the  whole  scheme  of  revolution. 
Had  Milligan  made  any  such  attempt  at  hold 
ing  back,  or  refused  to  co-operate  with  Dodd 
in  this  scheme,  it  could  easily  have  been 
shown.  If  it  had  been  made,  either  by  letter 
or  orally,  he  could  have  proven  it  before  this 
Court.  The  burden  of  proof  is  upon  him  to 
show  that  fact,  and  if  he  does  not  show  it — 
and  he  has  failed  to  do  so — it  is  to  be  pre 
sumed  against  him,  by  this  Court,  that  he 
acted  in  concert  with  Dodd,  and  assented. to 
all  his  revolutionary  schemes. 

Now  let  us  sec  whether  Mr.  Milligan's  ac 
tion  subsequent  to  this  occasion,  was  consist 
ent  with  his  knowledge  of  Dodd's  plans  and 
schemes.  On  the  13th  of  August,  before  the 
action  of  the  State  Central  Committee  had 
reached  Mr.  Milligan,  he  addressed  a  conven 
tion  of  5,000  men  at  Fort  Wayne.  In  that 
speech,  as  a  witness  for  the  Government,  W. 
S.  Bush  testifies,  he  made  the  following  state 
ments: 

"He  referred  to  the  country  as  desolated  by 
the  war  and  the  oppressions  of  the  Administra 
tion.  He  spoke  of  the  freedom  of  speech  al 
lowed,  as  simply  that  granted  by  a  Lincoln 
mob — as  a  freedom  in  name  rather  than  in  fact." 
(Page  575.)  "He  stated  that  if  the  war  was  right 
the  draft  was  right,  and  if  they  considered 
the  war  right,  and  were  good  citizens,  they 
would  not  grumble  about  the  draft."  "He  de 
nied  that  the  war  was  right,  and  proceeded  to 
argue  that,  under  the  Constitution,  the  Presi 
dent  had  no  power  to  coerce  a  State;  and 
asked  if  those  wlio  entered  the  army,  would 
look  in  the  future,  for  their  laurels,  to  such 
battles  as  Bull  Run,  Chicamauga  and  Red 
river.  He  also  appealed  -to  them  to  consider 
the  condition  of  their  wives  and  children  at 
home,  destitute,  and  dependent  on  the  charity 
of  their  neighbors,  if  they  entered  the  army; 


286 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


and  risked  whether  they  considered  it  a  duty 
to  make  such  a  sacrifice?"  (Page  576.) 

"He  spoke  of  him  (the  President)  as  a  ty 
rant,"  (Page  577.)  "He  held  that  the  war 
itself  was  disunion,  and  that  the  Union  itself 
could  not  be  restored  by  war."  (Page  577.) 
That  the  war  "had  made  the  Government  a 
despotism. 

"He  treated  the  war  itself  as  a  dissolution 
of  the  Government. 

"He  spoke  of  the  Government  as  a  confed 
eration  of  the  several  States  rather  than  a 
unity." 

I  asked  the  witness  what  Mr.  Milligan  sta 
ted  "as  to  the  right  of  the  Government  of  the 
United  States  to  make  war  upon  rebels,  or 
those  in  rebellion  against  the  General  Govern 
ment?" 

He  answered:  "He  denied  that  right." 

Here  we  have  from  Mr.  Milligan's  own  lips, 
a  reiteration,  to  a  public  assemblage,  of  the 
cardinal  principles  of  the  order  itself.  Here 
we  have  him  trying  to  educate  the  masses  of 
the  Democratic  party  up  to  the  disloyal  stand 
ard  of  this  order.  Here  we  have  him  advoca 
ting  and  indorsing  the  principles  avowed  by 
the  rebels  in  arms  against  the  Government. 
The  very  principles  for  which  they  are  fight 
ing  to-day,  he  maintained  in  public  speech 
before  our  people.  The  only  difference  be 
tween  Mr.  Milligan  and  the  most  bitter  rebel 
of  them  all,  was  that  one  was  using  his  arms 
to  enforce  his  principles,  the  other  by  his 
voice  and  pen  attempted  to  sustain  their  ar 
mies  in  that  cause,  weakening  the  cause  of 
the  Government,  and  adding  numbers  to  the 
rebel  ranks.  What  could  he  do  more?  What 
would  tend  more  effectually  to  stir  up  to  in 
surrection  a  brave  people,  than  to  teach  them 
that  their  Government  was  waging  an  unjust 
war.  an  unconstitutional  war;  that  it  was 
forcing  them  to  fight  its  battles  of  tyranny 
and  oppression,  against  a  people  who  were 
fighting  simply  for  their  just  rights,  for  the 
right  of  a  State  to  secede  in  its  sovereign  ca 
pacity;  that  this  Government  was  forcing 
them  into  her  armies  by  legions,  and  slaugh 
tering  them  by  thousands,  and  then  citing 
them  to  the  battle-fields  where  that  Govern 
ment,  had  been  defeated:  I  ask  what  more  ef 
fective  mode  could  have  been  chosen  to  give 
aid  and  sympathy  to  the  enemy,  to  weaken  the 
cause  of  the  Government,  to  stir  up  the  hearts 
of  the  people  to  opposition  to  this  tyranny, 
oppression  and  outrage,  that  he  had  pictured 
had  been  perpetrated  upon  them  by  their  Gov 
ernment? 

I  say,  then,  this  speech  was  in  entire  keep 
ing  with  the  fact  that  Mr.  Milligan  must  have 
known  of  the  intentions  and  plan  of  Dodd 
for  revolution.  He  was  aiding  that  scheme  ns 
effectually  as  he  possibly  could.  lie  was  BOAV- 
ing  the  seeds  of  bitterness  in  the  hearts  of  the 
masses,  the  harvest  of  which  was  to  be  the 
garnering  of  the  dead  bodies  of  the  peaceful 
citizens,  defenseless  women  and  little  chil 
dren  of  j'our  land. 

We  have  heard  much  argumentation,  much 
special  pleading,  and  many  elegant  periods, 
from  the  counsel  for  the  accused,  based  upon 
the  action  of  Mr.  Bingham  and  Mr.  Kerr  in 


stopping  this  revolution  of  their  own  will  be 
fore  it  had  culminated.  We  have  some  little 
light  upon  this  question  as  evidence  that  is 
recorded  matter  made  at  the  time.  This  is 
better  evidence  than  the  recollection  or  the 
oral  explanation  of  these  facts  by  any  witness. 
It  is  a  letter  of  Mr.  Kerr's,  directed  to  Mr. 
Bingham,  and  dated  August  8,  1864.  In  that 
he  says:  "I  am  not  content  with  the  result  of 
our  conference  on  Friday.  It  is  not  decisive 
enough."  Here  was  a  member  of  that  confer 
ence,  the  man  who  brought  about  that,  meet 
ing,  and  took  moreintercst  in  it  than  any  other 
member,  was  as  honest  as  any  one  of  them, 
and  yet  he  states  that  the  meeting  was  not  de 
cisive.  He  goes  on,  and  says  further:  "it  is 
enveloped  in  too  much  uncertainty."  If  thip 
whole  scheme  of  revolution  had  been  aban 
doned  by  Dodd,  and  they  had  all  resolved  that 
nothing  more  was  to  be  done  in  the  matter, 
as  the  gentlemen  argue  and  claim,  why  and 
wherefore  was  it  enveloped  in  uncertainty? 
Further  on  he  says:  "There  was  apparent,  on 
the  part  of  certain  bad  and  reckless  men,  too 
deep  a  determination  to  persist  in  their  un 
lawful  and  revolutionary  purposes."  Here  is 
a  letter  written  soon  after  this  meeting,  by 
Mr.  Kerr,  an  honest  and  upright  man,  as  is 
admitted  by  all,  to  another  member  of  that 
meeting,  in  which  he  not  only  denies  that  the 
scheme  had  been  abandoned  and  stopped,  but 
affirmatively  says,  that  there  has  been  appa 
rent,  on  the  part  of  certain  bad  and  reckless 
men,'"  too  deep  a  determination  to  persist  in 
their  unlawful  and  revolutionary  purposes. 
Gentlemen,  how  do  you  explain  this  record 
made  at  the  time? 

Then  he  goes  on  with  this  statement:  "That 
they  should  have  been  required  to  come  to  a 
more  definite  and  satisfactory  abandonment 
of  all  such  purposes."  They  should  have 
done  what  they  did  not  do,  Mr.  Kerr  says. 
The  testimony  of  Mr.  Bingham,  the  testimony 
of  all  the  witnesses  upon  this  case,  must  be  ex 
plained  with  this  light  of  Mr.  Kerr's  letter 
thrown  upon  it,  Listen  a  little  further  to  Mr. 
Kerr:  "Ought,  we  not  to  take  further  ac 
tion  before  the  early  day  to  which  we  ad 
journed?  *  *  *  It  must  not  be."  What 
was  this  that  must  not  be?  Let  the  Court 
think  for  a  moment,  and  answer  the  question. 
He  adds:  "If*  must  be  circumvented,  and  that 
speedily,  and  by  us."  What  was  this  that  must  bo 
circumvented  speedily,  and  by  us?  Here  is  this 
letter  dated  the  8th  of  August,  after  this  meet 
ing  had  taken  place,  at  which  this  witness  un 
dertook  to  say  this  whole  scheme  was  stopped; 
urging  Bingham  to  his  utmost  vigor  to  unite 
with  him  and  all  good  men,  in  stopping  what 
these  gentlemen  claim  was  stopped  on  the  4th 
of  August,  by  Mr.  Kerr.  This  is  a  singular 
position  for  Mr.  Kerr,  that  he  was  appealing 
by  the  strongest  exhortations,  which  words 
could  utter,  to  the  brother  members  of  his 
party,  and  to  his  old  friend,  Mr.  Bingham,  to 
join  him,  and  to  assist  by  every  means  in  their 
power  to  circumvent  these  bad  men,  and  to 
stop  this  scheme — making  these  appeals  on  the 
8th  to  stop,  as  I  before  remarked,  what  lie, 
Mr.  Kerr,  had  stopped  on  the  4th!  Is  thii 
1  true? 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


287 


The  entire  proof  made  during  this  trial  goes  j  their  rights.  I  do  not  mean  that  Governor 
to  show  that  the  scheme  of  revolution  never  I  Morton,  or  the  Legislature,  or  any  machinery 
was  entirely  abandoned.  On  or  about  the  j  of  office,  getting  its  authority  from  the  people 
12th  of  August,  at  the  identical  meeting  re- j  through  elections,  is  the  State.  But  I  mean 
ferred  to  by  Kerr  in  his  letter  as  necessary  to  j  that  the  free  range  of  all  its  people  is  the 
be  held,  some  of  the  leading  loyal  Democrats 
of  the  State  did  get  promises  from  Dodd  and 
Walker  to  abandon  their  scheme.  But  that 
abandonment  was  simply  of  the  time  set  for 


the  insurrection;  and  those  men  moved  for 
ward    just    as   earnestly    and    vigorously    in 


State.  The  officers  are  the  mere  servants  of 
the  people,  the  mere  agents  of  the  Govern 
ment.  Where  does  sovereignty  rest?  It  is 
time  to  settle  this  question.  If  you  are  wrong 
in  your  theories,  you  should  change  your  prin 
ciples.  I  know  no  sovereignty  in  the  Federal 


their  organization  and  purposes,  afterward  as  i  Government,  or  in  the  State  Government,  as 
before.     The  first  lot  of   Dodd's  arms,  which   contra-distinguished  from  the  people  of    the 


Walker  had  purchased,  ten  boxes, 
brought  here  and  concealed,  ready  for  use, 
about  the  Gth  of  August,  two  days  after  this 
first  meeting,  when /this  whole  revolution  was 
abandoned,  as, the  defense  claims.  The  next 
lot  came  on  the  20th  of  August,  two  weeks  af 
terward;  and  yet  we  are  told  this  whole 
scheme  was  abandoned,  and  nothing  was  done 
in  pursuance  of  it.  Gentlemen,  the  proof  is 
against,  you. 

This  conspiracy  and  revolution  failed,  sim 
ply  because  the  hand  of  the  Government  was 
at  its  throat,  and  the  strong  military  arm  of 
the  Government  had  fallen  upon  it;  its  mailed 
hand  had  grappled  it,  and  its  giant-like  grip 
was  all  the  more  determined  in  that  its  dragon- 
like  foe  was  both  subtle  and  strong. 

To  rebut  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Bush  in  ref 
erence  to  this  speech  of  Mr.  Milligan  at  Fort 
Wayne,  the  accused  put  upon  the  stand  Mr. 
Winters,  the  editor  of  the  Huntington  Demo 
crat,  who  started  out  with  the  assertion,  in  re 
ply  to  a  question  of  the  accused:  "I  don't 
know  what  you  mean  by  the  word  loyal."  It 
did  seem  to  me  that  this  was  the  only  unqual 
ified,  truthful  utterance  that  the  witness  gave 
during  his  whole  testimony.  He  admitted 
that  in  Mr.  Milligan's  speech,  at  Fort  Wayne, 
he  "denied  the  power  to  coerce  States,  but 
admitted  the  power  to  coerce  individual  citi 
zens."  In  his  cross-examination  he  states  that 
Mr.  Milligan  "has  always  maintained  that  a 
war  against  sovereign  States  was  an  absurd 
ity.  •*  *  I  have  heard  him  say  that  the 
war  was  unconstitutional,  and  he  was  against 
it;"  that  he  was  opposed  to  the  prosecution  of 
the  present  war;  and  that  "he  said  at  the  Fort 
Wayne  meeting  that  the  existing  war  was  an 
absurdity." 

This  witness  subscribed  fully  to  the  obliga 
tion  of  the  first  degree  of  the  Order  of  Amer 
ican  Knights.  I  read  to  him  various  extracts 
from  Mr.  Bush's  report  of  that  speech,  as  pub 
lished  in  the  Cincinnati  Gazette,  of  August 
IGth,  and  asked  if  they  were  correct.  One  of 
the  extracts  was  as  follows: 

"Thoy  (the  States)  were  thirteen  nations, 
and  finally  formed  a  Constitution,  adopted 
separately  by  the  several  States,  Virginia  re- 
Berving  to  herself  the  right  at  any  time  to 
withdraw  from  the  Union.  And  what  Vir 
ginia  has  reserved,  all  the  States  had  a  right 
to  reserve.  Their  actipn  was  based  entirely 
on  State  rights.  The  Declaration/ of  Indepen 
dence  states  who  is  to  be  the  judge  when  the 
Government  shall  be  subverted.  It  guaran 
tees  to  the  people  the  right  of  revolution  when 


State.  1  believe  in  the  doctrine  of  popular 
sovereignty,  instead  of  sovereignty  in  the  ma 
chinery  of  the  Government." 

I  then  asked  the  witness,  is  that  a  correct 
statement  of  what  Mr.  Milligan  said  on  that 
point.  Mr.  Winters  answered,  "I  don't  recol 
lect  whether  those  are  the  exact  words:  I 
think  that  is  the  substance  of  what  he  said 
on  that  subject.'1  I  read  other  paragraphs  to 
him,  and  the  whole  efifect  of  his  testimony  was 
to  corroborate  Mr.  Bush's  statement,  and  to 
certify  to  the  correctness  of  his  report.  He 
says  in  answer  to  one  question  :  "The  deduc 
tion  made  from  his  speech,"  referring  to  Mr. 
Milligan's  speech  at  Fort  Wayne,  "was  that 
the  war  was  unconstitutional." 

Mr.  Bird,  one  of  Mr.  Milligan's  witnesses, 
and  a  Son  of  Liberty,  in  his  cross-examina 
tion,  admitted  that  Mr.  Milligan  in  that  speech 
said  the  war  was  wrong.  Bird's  testimony  as 
to  that  meeting,  a.nd  wh%t  was  said  there  by 
Mr.  Milligan,  entirely  corroborates  the  testi 
mony  of  Mr.  Bush.  At  the  time  of  this  speech 
of  Mr.  Milligan's  at  Fort  Wayne,  the  order 
was  still  in  existence,  as  is  proven  by  Mr. 
Harrison,  who  performed  his  official  duties  as 
Grand  Secretary,  up  to  August  20th,  18G4,  the 
day  Mr.  Dodd  was  still  receiving  arms  for  dis 
tribution  to  the  members  of  this  order,  and 
the  day  of  Mr.  Harrison's  arrest.  So  that 
this  order  was  in  full  and  vigorous  operation 
up  to  the  day  when  the  Government  laid  her 
hands  upon  it.  In  fact,  it  was  in  full  opera 
tion  up  to  the  session  of  the  Chicago  Conven 
tion,  as  proved  by  Mr.  Wilson;  up  to  the  time 
of  Dodd's  arrest,  September  3d,  and  the  ar 
rest  of  Bowles,  September  18th,  as  testified  by 
Mr.  Heffren.  Hcffrcn  says:  "About  the  time  of 
Dodd's  arrest.  I  wrote  a  letter  to  each  of  the 

Dr. 
Wilson  had  come  to  mo  and  said that 


majoi'-gcnerals  of  the  order. 


as  I  was  Deputy  Grand  Commander,  and  Dodd 
was  arrested,  I  must  write  to  Mr.  Vallandig- 
ham  and  each  of  the  major-generals.  I  did 
not  want  to  do  so,  but  he  insisted,  and  I  wrote 
to  Mr.  Humphreys,  Mr.  Milligan,  John  C. 
Walker  and  Mr.  Vallandigham.  I  wrote  to 
Dr.  Bowles,  but  as  I  understood  he  was  ar 
rested  for  harboring  deserters,  I  did  not  send 
the  letter." 

"Q.  How  did  you  write  to  Vallandigham? 

"A.  As  Supreme  Commander  of  the  Su 
preme  Council  of  the  United  States.  The  sub 
stance  of  the  letter  was,  should  we  submit  or 
fight? 

"Q.  Whom  did  }rou  mean  by  'we?' 

"A.  I  meant  the   members  of  the  Order  of 


they  can  no  longer  tolerate  the  invasion  of    American  Knights." 


288 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


This  action  on  the  part  of  Wilson,  and 
Heffren,  the  Deputy  Grand  Commander  of  the 
order,  was  sometime  after  the  3d  of  Septem 
ber,  and  shows  that  the  order  was  in  full  force 
at  that  date. 

"  Q.  Did  these  gentlemen  write  back? 

"  A.  None  but  Mr.  Milligan  and  Mr.  Hum 
phreys.  Mr.  Milligan's  letter  was  signed  by 
some  gentleman  as  his  student,  as  he  was 
sick,  and  stated  that  it  would  not  do  at  the 
present  time,  but  that  we  must  bide  our  time." 
This  letter,  written  by  Mr.  Milligan's  author 
ity — for  of  course  no  one  would  open  a  letter 
written  to  Mr.  Milligan,  but  himself,  and 
whoever  answered  it  must  have  done  fio  by 
his  instructions — shows  that  it  was  not  in 
surrection  itself  that  he  was  opposed  to,  but 
that  the  time  was  not  propitious.  Mr.  Milli 
gan  was  a  prominent  member  of  the  order,  and 
one  of  its  leaders.  The  question  of  his  nomina 
tion  for  Governor  had  been  discussed  in  the  Feb 
ruary  Council,  as  shown  by  Mr.  Heffren's  testi 
mony  ;  it  is  also  shown  in  the  letter  of  Mr. 
Milligan  to  H.  H.  Dodd,  dated  May  9th,  1864, 
in  which  he  declines  the  nomination  of  Gov 
ernor  at  the  hands  of  McDonald's  friends,  "be 
cause/'  he  says,  "I  could  not  represent  them; 
there  is  no  similarity  between  us.  And  all 
this  is  not  so  discouraging  as  the  fact  that 
men  of  the  stamp  of  Judge  Hanna,  whose 
profession  of  principles  I  could  represent, 
prefer  McDonald  on  account  of  his  supposed 
availability.  It  detracts  much  from  my  confi 
dence  in  our  ultirnat^succcss,  when  men  of  so 
much  seeming  patriotism,  are  willing  for 
mere  temporary  purposes  to  abandon  the 
great  principles  of  civil  liberty.  What  will 
those  of  less  pretensions  do,  when  the  real 
contest  comes;  when  life  and  property  all  de 
pend  on  the  issue;  when  bullets  instead  of 
ballots  are  cast,  and  when  the  halter  is  a  pre 
amble  to  our  platform?  For,  unless  Federal 
encroachments  are  arrested  in  the  States  by 
the  efforts,  as  well  of  the  Legislative  as  the 
Executive,  then  will  our  lives  and  fortunes  fol 
low  where  our  honors  will  have  gone  before." 
It  is  an  easy  matter  to  get  at  the  motives  that 
actuated  Mr.  Milligan  in  his  connection  with 
this  order,  from  this  piece  of  record  which  he 
has  left  behind  him.  The  lame  manner  in 
which  his  counsel  lias  undertaken  to  explain 
this  letter,  is  simply  amusing. 

When  we  recollect  that  the  contest  to  which 
Mr.  Milligan  constantly  looked  forward,  was 
the  contest  between  the  disaffected  few  of  these 
'free  States — that  class  of  people  whom  he 
represented,  malcontents,  who  believe  that, 
the  Government  is  usurping  powers,  and 
must  bo  expelled  by  force — and  the  Govern 
ment.  Entertaining  these  principles,  he  says 
in  his  letter,  "when  the  real  contest  comes ; 
when  life  and  property  all  depend  upon  the 
issue;  when  bullets  instead  of  ballots  are 
cast,  and  when  the  halter  is  a  preamble  to  our 
platform."  For  an  explanation  of  what  he 
means  by  this,  he  continues:  "For  unless 
Federal  encroachments" — this  was  the  power 
with  which  the  contest  was  to  be  waged — "are 
resisted  in  the  States,  by  the  efforts  as  w.ell  of 
the  Legislative  as  of  the  Executive,  then  will 
our  live*  and  fortunes  follow  whore  our  honors 


I  will  have  gone  before."  The  real  meaning 
!  and  intent  of  this  letter,  and  the  purpose  of 
:  this  man  in  writing  it,  was  this:  every  effort 
;  was  being  made  by  his  party  to  get  the  ma 
chinery  of  the  State  Government  into  their 
own  hands,  to  obtain  control  of  the  Legisla 
ture,  and  to  have  one  of  themselves  elected 
Governor;  then,  Avith  their  theories  of  Gov 
ernment  of  State  sovereignty,  and  of  State 
rights,  they  could  plant  the  State  of  Indiana 
against  the  Federal  Government,  and  make 
Indiana  a  second  South  Carolina,  to  lead  the 
van  in  establishing  a  North-western  Confed 
eracy!  It  was  but  again  laying  down  an 
abominable  plot  of  rebellion  to  be  consum 
mated  in  these  Northern  States,  as  it  has  been 
in  the  Southern;  to  blacken  and  desolate  this 
beautiful  land  of  ours,  as  it  has  blackened 
theirs;  to  send  up  from  every  hearth  the  wail 
of  desolation  and  death  that  must  follow  in 
the  wake  of  this  phantom  of  secession! 

To  prove  his  loyalty,  Mr.  Milligan  intro 
duced  a  number  of  witnesses,  most  of  whom 
were  fellow-members  of  the  conspiracy.  Some 
of  them,  by  their  own  showing,  were  disloyal. 
John  Roach,  one  of  his  witnesses,  in  speaking 
of  Mr.  Milligan,  said:  "I  heard  him  make 
some  remarks,  in  which  he  held  that  some  of 
the  officers  of  the  Government  were  exceeding 
the  authority  of  law;  he  complained  that  they 
were  not  acting  according  to  law;"  in  other 
words,  he  was  repeating  the  principles  of  the 
Order  of  Sons  of  Liberty.  Another  witness, 
that  Mr.  Milligan  put  upon  the  stand  to 
support  his  character  for  loyalty,  etc.,  M.  B. 
Brant,  testified  as  follows:  "Republicans  re 
garded  him  as  connected  with  a  secret  organ 
ization  that  is  in  favor  of  further  secession 
among  the  States — a  North-western  Confeder 
acy."  The  witness  gives  one  reason  why  they 
regarded  him  as  dislo3:al,  in  these  words: 
"Mr.  Milligan  made  speeches  a  year  ago  last 
fall,  and  some  persons  in  the  Republican 
party  began  to  regard  him  as  a  man  who  was 
opposed  to  the  Government,  and  was  willing 
and  anxious  that  there  should  be  a  North 
western  Confederacy,  and  that  he  was  in  favor 
of  it." 

Thus  we  see  that  Mr.  Milligan's  treason  had 
not  confined  itself  solely  to  his  expressions 
and  actions  in  connection  with  the  order,  but 
that  he  was  at  his  work  of  educating  the  masses 
of  the  Democratic  party,  and  the  people  of  the 
land,  up  to  his  disloyal  standard. 

Witnesses  were  also  introduced  by  Mr.  Mil 
ligan  to  impeach  the  reputation  for  truth  and 
veracity  of  Dr.  Zumro,  a  witness  for  the  Gov 
ernment.  The  doubtful  loyalty  of  these  men, 
who  themselves  inuorsed  the  good  character 
of  Mr.  Zumro,  when  they  joined  the  order 
with  him,  and  the  strength  of  the  rebutting 
testimony  of  the  witnesses  in  favor  of  the 
j  character  of  Dr.  Zumro  for  truth  and  verncity : 
not  only  of  those  of  his  own  political  faith,  but. 
those  opposed  to  him,  and  of  members  of  the 
order,  substantiate  his  truthfulness,  and  leave 
his  testimony  entitled  to  full  credit.  Dr.  Zumro 
'testifies  that  he  was  appointed  one  of  a  com- 
•mittee  from  the  temple  of  the  order  in  his 
township,  to  visit  Mr.  Milligan,  in  Hunting- 
ton,  and  loam  what  the  order-  proposed  to  do 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


289 


about  resisting  the  draft.  He  says:  "Tasked 
Mr.  Milligan  his  opinion  as  to  whether  we  had 
better  resist  or  not;  he  said  it  was  as  good  a 
time  now  as  any  to  resist."  "He  concluded 
that  we  should  form  in  companies  or  squads, 
just  as  we  could;  that  ten  men  were  sufficient 
to  start  with." 

This  is  the  evidence,  substantially,  in  refer 
ence  to  Mr.  Milligan,  for  and  against  him.  It 
all  shows  that  he  was  really  the  right  arm  of 
this  conspiracy  in  this  State;  the  active,  ener 
getic,  and  -venomous  leader.  A  man  of  un 
questioned  ability  and  determination,  and 
with  a  heart  full  of  hatred,  envy,  and  malice, 
he  moved  forward  in  this  scheme  of  revolution 
with  a  coolness  and  intensity  of  purpose,  not 
exceeded  by  any  other  member  of  the  con 
spiracy.  His  intelligence  and  ability  gave 
him  a  powerful  influence  for  evil,  and  he  used 
that  power  to  the  utmost.  I  can  offer  no  bet 
ter  comment  on  the  testimony  bearing  on  the 
case  of  Mr.  Milligan,  than  by  quoting  the 
eloquent  words  of  my  friend,  Mr.  Ray.  He 
says:  "It  is  another  and  a  wicked  thing  to  go 
bawling  about  the  country,  and  in  flaming 
speech,  and  mock  patriotism,  arraigning  the 
authorities  as  usurpers,  tyrants  and  despots; 
poisoning  the  public  heart  against  those  in 
authority — clamoring  for  peace  in  the  face  of 
embattled  armies — fanning  the  embers  of  dis 
cord  and  revolt — kindling,  by  incendiary  ap 
peals,  the  fires  of  insurrection  and  revolution, 
and  finally  identifying  himself  with  the  cause 
of  rebels  and  traitors,  and  lending  himself  in 
thought  and  deed,  by  night  and  by  day,  in 
secret  and  in  public,  giving  aid  and  comfort 
to  the  public  enemy  against  his  own  Govern 
ment — this  is  conspiracy  and  treason — it  has  all 
the  disloyal  lineaments  of  treasonable  deform 
ity,  and  neither  eloquence  nor  art,  nor  paint 
ing,  nor  poetry,  can  change  it — its  office  is 
discord,  war,  and  misery.* 

The  counsel  must  have  had  Mr.  Milligan  in 
his  mind's  eye  when  penning  that  eloquent 
description  of  a  conspirator  and  a  traitor. 

ANDRp;W    HUMPHREYS. 

We  come  now  to  the  consideration  of  the 
evidence  in  its  bearing  upon  the  accused, 
Andrew  Humphreys.  It  has  been  conclusively 
shown  that  Mr.  Humphreys  belonged  to  this 
conspiracy:  that  he  was,  at  least,  a  third  de 
gree  member,  and  attended,  beyond  question, 
the  State  Council  of  the  14th  of  June  last,  in 
the  evening.  There  is  no  evidence  introduced 
inconsistent  with  this,  and  all  the  evidence 
introduced  by  the  defense  corroborates  the 
Government  witnesses,  in  stating  that  he  was 
here  in  the  evening  of  the  14th  of  June.  If 
the  order  in  his  township  had  been  abandoned 
and  the  papers  destroyed  in  February  or  March 
previously,  as  Mr.  Humphreys  has  attempted  to 
show,  then  he  must  have  attended  this  Grand 
Council  in  June,  by  virtue  of  his  military 
rank.  If  the  order  in  his  township  had  been 
abandoned,  he  did  not  come  up  as  a  delegate 
from  that  temple.  This  circumstance  goes 
strongly  to  support  the  theory  that  he  did 
accept  and  hold  the  position  nominally  of  a 
major-general  in  this  order.  The  evidence 
« gainst  Mr.  Humphreys,  we  will  briefly  review. 
19 


When  Mr.  Humphreys  became  a  member  of 
the  order,  is  not  definitely  proven.  A  branch 
temple  was  organized  in  Linton,  in  September, 
18G3,  as  W.  G.  Moss,  a  witness  for  the  accused, 
testifies.  Mr.  Moss  and  Mr.  Heffren,  who  tes 
tify  that  Mr.  Humphreys  told  them  that  he 
had  abandoned  the  order,  both  establish  his 
membership  up  to  at  least  February  16th,  1804. 
His  membership,  on  the  10th  of  September,  is 
proven  by  the  witness,  William  M.  Harrison, 
who  testifies  that  the  State  Council  of  Septem 
ber  10th,  1863,  elected  "Andrew  Humphreys  » 
major-general  under  that  (the  military)  bill." 
Subsequently  the  witness  says:  "My  under 
standing  of  the  matter  was  that  appointments 
were  made  among  members  of  the  order  only." 
He  also  names  the  delegates  to  the  Council  in 
Chicago,  in  September,  1863,  and  says:  "At 
the  meeting  in  September,  John  G.  Davis  and 
D.  R.  Eckels  were  elected  delegates  to  the 
Council  in  Chicago,  in  September,  1863;  and, 
I  think,  Humphreys  also."  He  adds:  "I  un 
derstood  also  that  Humphreys  was  present  at 
that  meeting,  and  Yeakle  and  Dr.  Bowles.  I 
got  this  information  from  Dodd."  Mr.  Hum 
phreys  was  re-elected  a  major-general  at  the 
February  Council,  while  Major  Conklin  and 
Dr.  Yeakle  were  superseded  in  their  districts 
by  Dr.  Bowles  and  John  C.  Walker.  He  was 
recognized  by  the  officers  of  the  State  Council 
as  retaining  his  membership,  a  package  of  the 
proceedings  of  the  February  Council  being 
addressed  to  him  for  the^benefit  of  the  order 
in  Green  county,  some  weeks  after  the  session 
of  that  Council.  The  testimony  of  Stidger 
and  of  Harrison  is  positive  as  to  the  presence 
of  Humphreys  at  the  Council  of  June  14th. 
Harrison  states  that  Mr.  Humphreys  was  pres 
ent.  In  the  cross-examination  he  says:  "He 
came  into  the  meeting  in  the  evening.  I  saw 
him  in  the  room,  not  to  exceed  one-half  or  three- 
quarters  of  an  hour,  at  that  meeting.  *  * 
I  saw  him  at  the  meeting  before  it  adjourned." 
When  asked  whether  he  knew  that  Mr.  Hum 
phreys  was  a  member  of  the  order  at  all,  he 
answered,  "I  know  it  simply  from  the  fact 
that  I  saw  him  at  this  meeting  on  the  14th  of 
June.  #  *  I  recollect  of  no  person  coming 
in  who  was  not  a  delegate,  and  had  not  become 
a  member  #  *  No  person,  to  my  knowl 
edge,  entered  the  Grand  Council  who  was  not 
a  member." 

Stidger  testifies  that  Mr.  Humphreys  was 
present;  that  "Mr.  Dodd  told  me  it  was  An 
drew  Humphreys;  that  Mr.  Dodd  called  over 
the  list  of  major-generals,  on  which  was  the 
name  of  Andrew  Humphreys,  at  that  session." 

To  rebut  this  testimony,  Mr.  Moss  testifies 
that  Mr.  Humphreys  could  not  have  been 
present.  He  states  that  he  carefully  examined 
the  account-books  to  determine  that  point. 
When  asked,  on  cross-examination,  whether 
Humphreys  came  to  Indianapolis  about  that 
timp,  he  answered:  "1  am  not  certain  of  it. 
But  I  think  he  might  have  been  here.;'  1 
again  asked,  "Was  he  not  here  in  the  evening?"' 
He  answered:  "I  can  not  say;  I  have  tried  to 
find  that  out  by  looking  at  our  books." 

In  the  re-examination,  the  witness  strength 
ens  the  evidence  for  the  Government.  He 
says: 


290 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


"The  last  entry  in  Humphreys'  handwrit 
ing,  was  on  the  13th  of  June,  about  the  last 
charge  entered  on  the  book  that  day." 

"Q.  At  what  time  would  a  man  probably 
arrive  here,  who  left  Lin  ton  after  the  time 
when  the  last  entry  must  have  been  made  by 
Humphreys? 

"A.  It  would  probably  have  been  6  or  7 
o'clock  in  the  evening  *  *  of  June  14th." 

His  membership  in  the  order,  just  before 
the  time  of  the  June  Council,  is  confirmed  by 
;:  nother  portion  of  Stidger's  testimony,  in 
reference  to  an  interview  with  Bowles,  on  the 
'28th  of  May: 

Bowles  told  me  "to  say  to  him  [Bullitt]  that 
he  had  seen  Mr.  Andrew  Humphreys  since 
their  meeting  at  Indianapolis,  and  Mr.  Hum 
phreys  had  agreed  to  take  the  position  of  a 
Brigadier,  and  take  charge  of  the  forces  in 
the  rear  in  case  of  an  uprising  of  the  order." 

Stidger  took  that  message  to  Bullitt,  and  he 
replied,  "It  suited  him  exactly  that  Hum 
phreys  was  willing  to  take  that  position." 

On  the  2d  of  August,  when  the  heads  of  the 
order  were  summoned  here  by  Dockl,  to  settle 
the  time  for  the  revolution,  Mr.  Humphreys 
was  sent  for.  Harrison  testifies  that  "Mr. 
Dodd  informed  me  that  he  intended  sending 
for  Mr.  Milligan,  for  Dr.  Bowles,  Mr.  Hum 
phreys,  and  Dr.  Yeakle."  He  was  still  in  the 
confidence  of  the  leading  an.d  active  men  in 
the  order,  in  September,  1864,  the  Deputy 
Grand  Commander,  Horace  Heffren,  address 
ing  an  official  letter  to  him,  at  that  time,  as  a 
major-general  of  the  order,  to  know  whether 
the  order  should  submit  to  Docld's  arrest  or 
fight.  He  answers  against  fighting,  and  in 
favor  of 'obedience  to  law,  and  takes  occasion, 
then,  to  repudiate  his  nomination  as  major- 
general.  This  was  at  a  time  when  the  Chiefs 
of  the  order  were  under  arrest,  and  their  co- 
conspirators,  all  over  the  State,  were  trem 
bling  with  apprehensions  of  arrest.  The  re 
pudiation  comes  too  late  at  that  day,  and  with 
an  ill  grace. 

In  regard  to  particular  acts  of  disloyalty, 
the  Government  has  proven,  by  a  witness, 
whom  the  accused  did  not  attempt  to  impeach, 
Elisha  Cowgill,  that  on  the  4th  of  June,  1863, 
Mr.  Humphreys  was,  in  "Sullivan  county,  at 
the  head  of  an  army  of  about  400  men."  He 
says: 

"Humphreys  talked  about  a  great  many 
things;  about  the  President  of  the  United 
States,  and  abused  him  to  the  whole  crowd. 
He  called  him  an  aid  tyrant,  who  was  usurp 
ing  a  great  deal  of  power,  and  wasting  the 
treasure  of  the  United  States,  and  the  lives 
of  its  citizens."  , 

The  spirit  of  that  armed  mob,  which  was 
following  a  detachment  of  United  States  sol 
diers,  who  had  impressed  a  horse  for  the  use 
of  a  sick  soldier,  as  though  they  were  enemies 
of  their  country,  was  also  shown  in  their 
treatment  of  the  officials  of  the  Government. 
Mr.  Cowgill,  who  was  a  Deputy  United  States 
Marshal,  says:  "Some  said  they  ought  to  kill 
me  before  I  got  out  of  the  crowd.  Numbers 
of  them  swore  that  they  would  kill  ,-iny  man 
who  should  attempt  to  enroll  Cass  township.'' 

He  also  testifies  that  Mr.  Humphreys  made 


a  second  speech,  "and  advised  them  to  go 
home  and  mind  their  own  business.  *  * 
He  also  told  them,  'Don't  sleep  too  soundly.'" 

A  few  days  after  the  enrolling  officer  of  that 
township,  after  partly  enrolling  the  township, 
was  murdered  in  cold  blood,  and  such  was  the 
intensity  of  the  disloyalty  of  that  neighbor 
hood,  or  the  strength  of  its  secret  organiza 
tions,  that  a  judicial  investigation  failed  to 
develop  the  name  of  the  murderer  or  murder 
ers.  This  was  the  state  of  society  in  which 
the  Order  of  American  Knights  was  organized, 
in  1863,  under  the  auspices  and  with  the  co 
operation  of  the  accused,  Andrew  Humphreys. 

How  he  prepared  for  the  extension  of  that 
order  is  shown  by  the  testimony  of  Nicholas 
Cochrane,  another  witness  for  the  Govern 
ment.  He  states  that  he  heard  Mr.  Humphreys 
speak,  about  the  5th  of  September,  1863,  in 
Jackson  township.  "He  criticised  the  Admin 
istration  tolerably  strongly,  *  *  and  he 
seemed  to  think  that  the  Democratic  party  was 
imposed  upon,  and  ought  to  stand  up  for  their 
rights.  *  *  The  time  had  come  when  Dem 
ocrats  should  not  appropriate  their  money,  or 
be  willing  to  spend  their  means  in  levity,  but 
should  be  preparing  for  self-defense." 

At  the  same  meeting  a  rebel,  from  Georgia, 
spoke,  advising  the  audience  "to  resist  the 
present  Abolition  Administration  at  the  sacri 
fice  of  their  lives,  their  families,  and  them 
selves,  if  necessary." 

Cheers  were  given  for  the  rebel  and  for  Mr. 
Humphreys. 

Mr.  Humphreys  called  two  witnesses,  as  to 
character  for  obedience  to  law.  Win.  Wines 
testified  to  Humphreys  having  spoken  in  favor 
of  the  enforcement  of  the  draft,  and  to  his 
general  reputation  for  loyalty.  On  cross- 
examination,  he  testified: 

"Some  of  myr friends  down  there,  of  my 
principles,  call  him  a  'Butternut,'  a  'Copper 
head,'  and  a  'traitor,'  speaking  of  him  polit 
ically." 

William  Johnson,  sr.,  proved  an  unfortunate 
witness  as  to  character.  He  testifies,  that  Mr. 
Humphreys'  reputation  as  a  law-abiding  citi 
zen  "with  that  party  he  goes  with,  is  good." 

In  speaking  of  a  speech,  made  by  Mr.  Hum 
phreys,  at  Linton,  in  August,  this  witness 
states:  "He  spoke  on  the  right  of  secession; 
on -the  right,  of  a  State  to  secede." 

In  the  cross-examination,  I  asked: 

"In  the  speech  which  you  heard  Mr.  Hum 
phreys  make,  did  he  argue  in  favor  of  the  right 
of  a  State  to  secede? 

"A.  I  so  understood  it. 

"Q.  Did  he  say  that  secession  was  right? 

"A.  Yes,  sir." 

To  learn  his  real  status  with  the  loyal  men 
of  Green  county,  I  asked  the  witness  to  state 
"what  his  character  for  loyalty  is  among  the 
men  of  unquestioned  loyalty  in  the  county 
where  he  lives." 

He  answered:   "It  is  not  considered  loyal." 

In  the  re-examination,  the  accused  asked: 

"Whom  do  you  consider  loyal? 

"A.  The  men  in  favor  of  the  prosecution  of 
the  war;  I  don't  understand  that  any  one  else 
is  loyal." 

From  all  the  evidence  in  reference  to  Andre- 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


291 


Humphreys,  I  am  inclined  to  believe  that  he 
did  not,  like  Dr.  Bowles  and  Mr.  Milligan, 
join  this  order  for  the  purpose  of  using  it,  or 
assisting  in  it,  to  bring  about  a  revolution  and 
insurrection  in  these  Northern  States,  but, 
like  Mr.  Bingham,  more,  perhaps,  for  political 
and  personal  ends.  He  used  the  order  to  place 
himself  in  some  political  position — to  keep  on 
the  surface  of  the  wave,  that  he  might,  in  the 
ebb  and  flow  of  the  tide,  be  placed  upon  some 
secure  rock  of  public  favor.  But  while  ad 
mitting  this,  we  must  insist  that  while  his 
motives  might  have  been  less  criminal  than 
others  in  joining  it,  yet  he  did  take  upon  him 
self  the  responsibility  of  joining  an  unlawful, 
secret  organization,  treasonable  in  its  intents 
and  purposes,  and  that  having  taken  upon 
himself  this  responsibility,  having  assisted  in 
placing  the  Government  in  great  danger  of 
being  destroyed  by  this  great  combination  of 
treasonable  elements,  he  should  be  held  to  a 
strict  accountability  for  that  act.  The  absence 
of  the  highest  treasonable  intent  can  only  be 
considered  in  mitigation  of  the  sentence. 
That  he  was  a  conspirator,  this  Commission 
must  find,  if  the  evidence  shows  that  he  be 
longed  to  this  organization,  and  if  a  conspir 
ator,  then  he  is  guilty  under  four  of  the  charges 
set  out  against  him.  Personal  considerations 
must  not  weigh  with  this  Court  in  making  up 
their  findings  and  sentence. 

While  we  have  human  sympathy,  we  must 
rise  above  human  frailty.  There  must  be  in 
fused  into  the  hearts  of  all  of  this  Court  a 
little  spark  of  Divine  justice.  While  weigh 
ing  in  the  balance  the  life  of  one  man,  his 
honor,  and  his  liberty — all  of  which,  I  grant 
you,  is  as  dear  to  him  as  yours  is  to  you — we 
must  remember  that  in  the  other  scale  is  placed 
the  life,  liberty,  and  well-heing  of  the  mil 
lions  of  this  nation,  and  Hie  perpetuity  of 
those  institutions  that  are  to  give  to  untold 
millions  yet  to  come  a  Government  that  will 
secure  to  its  people  the  highest  privileges  that 
citizens  can  claim,  the  maintainance  of  their 
inalienable  rights,  and  the  protection  of  their 

lives  and  liberties. 

• 

STEPHEN    HORSEY. 

We  come  last  to  the  accused,  Stephen  Hor 
sey.  To  the  address  submitted  by  him,  and 
drawn  up  by  Mr.  Gordon,  I  have  simply  to 
say,  that  no  man  is  so  poor,  or  so  humble, 
that  he  can  not  be  a  traitor;  and  no  man  is  so 
poor  and  humble  but  that  he  may  be  rich  in 
all  the  glorious  attributes  of  patriotism,  loy 
alty,  and  fealty  to  his  Government.  If  a  man 
becomes  so  poor,  so  low,  so  degraded,  as  to  be 
a  conspirator  and  traitor,  let  justice  be  meted 
out  to  him;  for  this  is  poverty  that  becomes  a 
crime. 

My  friend,  Mr.  Gordon,  in  drawing  up  this 
argument,  fell  into  an  error,  I  fully  believe 
unintentionally,  when  he  asserts  that  there  is 
no  proof  that  Horsey  was  ever  a  member  of 
the  Order  of  American  Knights,  or  Sons  of 
Liberty.  The  testimony  in  reference  to  Ste 
phen  Horsey,  is  briefly  as  follows: 

Wesley  Tranter,  a  witness  for  the  Govern 
ment,  testified  that  he  joined  the  Circle  of 
Honor,  in  May,  18G3,  at  the  solicitation  of 


Stephen  Horsey,  and  was  initiated  by  Horsey. 
Horsey  presided  at  a  second  meeting.  In 
January,  1864,  the  Circle  of  Honor  was  changed 
to  the  Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle,  as  Tranter 
understood,  but  which  Harrison  Connell  says: 
"I  think  they  called  it  the  American  Knights." 

At  a  meeting  held  January  27th  or  28th, 
1864,  Stephen  Horsey  was  present.  Tranter 
states  :  "  After  we  were  in,  Horsey  made  a  lit 
tle  speech,  and  said  we  were  to  have  some 
thing  different  from  the  other.  *  *  The 
oath  differed  from  the  former  oath,  but  I  can 
not  recollect  it;  there  was  something  about 
supporting  Jeff  Davis,  North  or  South.  In  a 
speech  that  John  W.  Stone  made,  there  was 
something  said  about  putting  Governor  Mor 
ton  out  of  the  way." 

It  was  also  stated  that,  "  There  was  to  be  a 
raid  made  on  this  place  (Indianapolis)  about 
five  days  from  the  1st  of  April.  *  «  We 
were  to  arm  ourselves  and  be  ready.  We  were 
to  take  this  place,  and  wear  out  the  soldiers." 
"When  we  made  the  raid  on  this  place,  the 
members  of  the  order  in  Illinois  were  to  make 
a  raid  on  Springfield,  and  those  in  Missouri 
on  St.  Louis.  Washington  was  to  be  attacked, 
and  Forrest  was  to  make  a  dash  into  Ken 
tucky." 

The  question  of  arms  was  discussed,  and 
Horsey  spoke  of  Shirkliff  and  Coffin  having 
taken  off  a  box  of  pistols  five  miles  from  the 
Shoals.  Horsey  "said  there  would  be  pistols 
taken  round  the  country,  and  any  one  could 
have  them  at  cost  and  carriage." 

Stephen  Teney,  another  witness  for  the  Gov 
ernment,  testifies  that  he  joined  the  Circle  of 
Honor  at  Horsey's  solicitation,  in  the  fall  of 
1863.  Teney  states:  "From  what  I  saw  and 
learned,  we  were  to  assist  the  South  if  called 
on." 

He  says:  "We  drilled  a  few  times  in  the 
township.  I  was  told  by  one  of  my  brothers, 
who  was  a  member  of  the  order,  that  they 
were  getting  arms  all  the  time.  *  *  *  That 
they  had  three  hundred  pistols  in  that  county." 

"Some  four  or  five  months  since,"  Teney 
says,  "he  (Horsey)  told  me  they  were  getting 
along  finely  with  their  order." 

On  cross-examination,  Mr.  Teney  was  asked: 

"Q.  Who  said  you  were  to  support  the 
South  ? 

"A.  Mr.  Horsey. 

"  Q.  What  was  his  language  ? 

"A.  He  swore  us  to  support  Jeff  Davis, 
North  or  South.' 

The  testimony  of  Tranter  and  Teney  was 
corroborated  by  Harrison  Connell,  who  was 
present  at  the  Gaddis  House,  where  this  se 
cret  order  met,  when  Stone  spoke.  On  cross- 
examination  he  was  asked:  "Whether  or  not, 
on  that  occasion,  those  that  entered  the  order, 
were  sworn  into  the  service  of  Jeff  Davis?" 

"A.  I  think  the  man  who  initiated  the  men 
that  night,  made  a  speech  to  that  effect.  *  * 
I  think  he  said  they  might  consider  themselves 
sworn  into  Jeff  Davis'  army,  and  the  men  were 
very  much  dissatisfied  with  his  speech." 

The  accused,  Stephen  Horsey,  is  identified 
as  one  of  the  delegates  to  the  State  Council  of 
June  14th.  Mr.  Harrison  testifies:  "A  gen 
tleman  by  the  name  of  Stephen  Horsey  was 


292 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


present,  but  I  do  not  know  whether  he  (the 
accused)  is  the  man  or  not;  I  do  not  recognize 
him;  at  all  events  he  was  a  delegate  from 
Martin  county."  Stidger  identifies  the  ac 
cused,  Stephen  Horsey,  as  present  at  the  June 
Council,  and  states  that,  when  the  case  of 
Coffin  was  discussed,  "they  asked  him  (Hor 
sey)  why  he  was  so  careless  as  to  initiate 
such  men  as  Coffin  into  the  order?" 

Harrison  Connell  testifies  that  in  the  latter 
part  of  July  or  in  August,  1864,  "Mr.  Horsey 
told  me  to  meet  him  about  a  mile  and  a  half 
from  the  Shoals,  a  certain  evening,  and  we 
went  a  piece  down  the  railroad,  and  we  found 
some  ammunition  lying  at  the  root  of  a  tree; 
we  put  it  in  a  sack  and  I  carried  it  home." 
The  ammunition  consisted  of  ua  keg  of  pow 
der,  a  package  of  lead,  and  a  package  of 
caps."  Mr.  Connell  says  that  we  went  with 
Horsey  "according  to  promise  *  *  made 
the  evening  before."  That  he  asked  Horsey 
about  the  ammunition  "when  we  went  back  to 
the  railroad.  He  told  me  there  was  some  am 
munition  there  he  wanted  me  to  take  care  of." 
Connell  took  care  of  it,  by  concealing  it  in  his 
barn. 

Mr.  Heffren  testifies  that  while  confined  in 
prison  with  Mr.  Horsey,  the  latter  admitted 
that  he  had  ammunition  concealed,  and  stated 
"where  he  hid  his  buckshot,  caps  and  pow 
der  ;  some  of  it  was  hid  in  a  manger,  to  feed 
horses,  and  in  a  barrel  the  caps  were  hid,  and 
the  horses  eat  from  the  top  of  the  manger; 
JWH!  other  portions  were  hid  in  a  stable,  and 
upon  the  plates  in  the  corn-crib.  Shirkliff 
carried  off  much  of  it,  and  the  powder  was 
hid  in  barrels  in  his  house. 

"There  were  four  hundred  pounds  of  lead, 
and  several  thousand  musket  caps;  I  think 
some  six  or  seven  kegs  of  powder." 

Horsey  also  "told  where  the  money  came 
from  that  they  got  it  with.  *  *  From  Dr. 
Bowles." 

I  desire  to  call  the  attention  of  the  Court 
for  a  moment  to  the  kind  of  evidence  sub 
mitted  on  behalf  of  the  Government  in  these 
cases.  Much  has  been  said  by  the  counsel  for 
the  accused,  in  the  attempt  to  bring  into  disre 
pute  the  witnesses  for  the  Government,  st3rling 
them  generally  as  spies,  detectives,  and  in 
formers.  Out  of  the  twenty-eight  witnesses 
introduced  by  the  Government,  there  were  just 
two  who  were,  as  the  counsel  styles  them,  spies 
or  detectives.  These  were  Stidger  and  Zumro. 
All  the  other  witnesses  stood  in  exactly  the 
same  relation  to  the  case  as  the  witnesses  in 
troduced  by  the  defense,  some  of  them  being 
members  of  the  order,  some  had  been  arrested 
and  released.  Why  they  should  be  followed 
by  such  malignity,  hatred,  and  abuse,  I  can 
not  conceive.  It  is  not  pretended  that  they 
swore  falsely,  or,  from  malice,  or  hope  of  re 
ward.  They  told  simply  what  they  were  com 
pelled  to  tell — the  truth,  and  the  whole  truth, 
and  this,  perhaps,  is  why  they  hate  them. 

In  using  the  word  "  informers,"  it  would 
seem,  the  counsel  have  overlooked  the  meaning 
of  the  term.  Burrill's  Laro  Dictionary  defines 
an  "informer"  as  "one  who  informs  against 
another  for  the  violation  of  some  penal  statute; 
one  who  gives  information  upon  which  another 


may  prosecute  for  the  violation  of  some  penal 
statute."  These  men  who  have  been  called  by 
the  Government,  gave  no  information  upon 
which  the  accused  were  prosecuted,  and  only 
when  the  cases  came  up  for  trial,  did  they  tes 
tify,  as  they  were  forced  to  do.  And  even 
had  they  been  informers,  within  the  meaning 
of  the  law,  will  the  gentlemen  show  me  what 
crime  it  is  for  a  man  to  so  love  his  country, 
and  so  earnestly  desire  its  peace  and  security 
as  to  endeavor  to  bring  to  justice  criminals 
who  were  seeking  the  lives  of  their  fellow  men, 
and  the  destruction  of  their  Government? 
Rather  would  not  the  counsel  have  stood  in  a 
more  enviable  light  had  they  stood  by  and  en 
couraged,  by  giving  the  just  meed  of  praise 
to  those  who  have  had  the  courage  and  manliness 
to  stand  by  their  Government,  and  who  have 
done  their  part  in  bringing  to  just  punish 
ment  those  who  have  sought  to  destroy  it. 
Think  for  a  moment  of  the  position  in  which 
the  Government  was  placed,  and  consider  the 
difficulties  and  almost  insurmountable  obsta 
cles  to  be  overcome  in  getting  at  the  secrets  of 
this  organization,  bound  together,  as  this  was, 
by  the  most  solemn  and  binding  of  oaths,  or 
get  witnesses  to  publish  the  secrets  of  this  or 
ganization,  when  they  who  did  so,  periled 
their  lives  in  the  act.  By  what  means,  gentle 
men,  could  we  have  developed  these  facts  in  a 
better  manner  than  we  have?  We  have  given 
you  the  evidence  of  men  who  went  into  the 
organization  for  the  purpose  of  revealing  their 
designs ;  we  have  added  to  them  those  who 
were  among  you  and  of  you,  and  thus  out  of 
your  own  mouths  we  have  made  the  proof 
against  you. 

Finally,  may  it  please  the  Court,  it  is  for  you 
to  consider  whether  the  evidence  supports  the 
charges  and  Specifications.  That  is  a  matter 
about  which  I'cairgive  you  no  opinion.  I  can 
only  say  that  if  it  is  proven  to  your  satisfaction 
that  the  accused,  all  of  them,  or  one  of  them, 
did  join  this  treasonable  Order  of  American 
Knights  or  Sons  of  Liberty,  did  assent  to  the 
principles  of  the  first  degree — and  all  third  de 
gree  members  must  have  so  assented — and  the 
obligation  of  that  first  degree,  they  are,  in  con 
templation  of  law,  conspirators  per  $e;  if  con 
spirators  per  se,  then,  guilty  of  the  first  charge, 
and  the  first  three  specifications.  The  fourth 
specification  under  that  charge,  simply  sets 
out  the  means  by  which  this  order  proposed 
to  carry  out  these  unlawful  designs. 

Charge  second,  affording  aid  and  comfort,  to 
the  rebels  against  the  authority  of  the  United 
States,  will  be  supported  if  it  has  been  proven 
that  these  parties  joined  themselves  to  a  secret, 
unlawful  organization,  whose  general  princi 
ples  and  purposes  were  adverse  to  the  Govern 
ment,  and  in  sympathy  and  general  co-opera 
tion  with  the  purposes  .and  principles  of  the  rebel 
insurgents.  The  three  specifications  under 
that  charge  simply  set  out  the  means,  or  man 
ner,  by  which  this  aid  and  comfort  to  rebels 
wns  to  be  given;  whether  the  proof  supports 
these  specifications,  is  alone  for  yoii  to  de 
termine. 

Charge  third,  inciting  insurrection,  and  the 
two  specifications  under  it,  will  be  supported, 
if  it  has  been  proven  to  yoit  that  by  public 


TREASON   TRIALS  AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


293 


addresses,  by  organizing  certain  societies,  and 
disseminating  certain  doctrines,  the  tendencies 
of  which  were  to  embitter  and  arouse  the  peo 
ple  to  open  hostility  to  the  Government.  If 
these  parties,  or  any  members  of  this  conspir 
acy  to  which  they  joined  themselves,  while 
carrying  out  the  general  purposes  of  the  con 
spiracy,  did  do  any  acts,  disseminate  any  sen 
timents,  make  incendiary  speeches,  attempt  to 
arm,  or  do  any  thing  the  tendency  of  which 
was  to  create  open  revolt,  or  an  effort  on  the 
part  of  the  people,  by  unlawful  means,  to 
change  their  Government,  and  set  aside  by 
force  any  parts  of  the  Government,  then  charge 
third  and  its  specifications  are  supported. 

Charge  fourth,  disloyal  practices,  and  the 
five  specifications  under  it,  set  out  substan 
tially,  that  these  accused  did  join  themselves 
to  a  secret,  unlawful  society  or  order,  known 
as  the  Order  of  American  Knights,  and  did, 
through,  and  by  means  of  this  unlawful  com 
bination  or  ordei',  disseminate  principles  ad 
verse  to  the  Government  of  the  United  States, 
and  did  counsel  and  advise  citizens  of  the 
United  States  to  disregard  the  authority  of  the 
United  States,  to  resist  a  call,  or  draft,  de 
signed  to  increase  her  armies,  and  did  arm 
certain  citizens  of  the  United  States  with  the 
intent  of  resisting  said  Government;  and  did 
attempt  to  arm,  and  did  arm  certain  members 
of  this  unlawful  order,  for  the  purpose  of 
carrying  out  these  unlawful  designs;  and 
that  these  parties  did  accept  and  hold  offices 
in  the  military  forces,  for  the  State  of  Indi 
ana,  in  this  unlawful,  secret  society,  or  order; 
that  said  offices  and  military  officers  were  un 
known  to  the  Constitution  and  Laws  of  the 
United  States.  Whether  the  proof  has  so 
connected  the  accused  with  this  order,  with  its 
treasonable  purposes  and  designs,  or  not,  with 
its  efforts  to  break  down  and  unlawfully  set 
aside  the  Government,  is  for  you  to  determine. 

Charge  fifth,  violation  of  the  laws  of  war, 
and  its  two  specifications,  charge  simply  that 
the  accused,  while  pretending  to  be  loyal, 
peaceable  citizens  of  the  United  States,  did 
attempt  to  introduce  enemies  of  the  United 
States  into  the  loyal  States,  and  did  thereby 
violate  their  allegiance  as  citizens  of  said 
Government;  that  they  did  attempt  to  do  this 
through  a  certain  secret,  unlawful  combina 
tion,  or  order.  Whether  the  proof  supporting 
these  allegations  has  been  made,  is  a  matter 
for  you  to  determine. 

Then,  gentlemen  of  the  Commission,  in  con 
clusion,  permit  me  to  say,  that  you  have,  in 
your  hands,  the  keeping  of  the  dearest  rights; 
in  fact,  all  the  rights  and  privileges  of  these 
four  men,  the  accused — that  their  rights  are  as 
sacred  and  dear  to  them  as  are  yours  to  you; 
that  they  are  possessed  of  the  same  attach 
ment  to  life,  its  hopes,  its  fears,  its  affections, 
its  aspirations,  as  yourselves;  I  charge  you, 
therefore,  if,  in  any  particular,  the  evidence 
has  failed  to  support  these  charges,  or  failed 
to  convict  these  men  of  these  high  crimes — 
the  highest  crimes  known  to  the  law — be  proud 
to  acquit  them;  send  them  forth  to  the  world, 
into  the  broad  light  of  day,  free  from  guilt, 
untarnished  with  even  the  stain  of  reproach; 


let  your  verdict  be  not  only  an  acquittal,  if 
these  charges  are  unsustained,  but  let  your 
action  go  further,  and  be  a  triumphant  vindi 
cation  of  their  characters. 

On  the  other  hand,  if  the  proof  does  sustain 
these  charges,  if  these  men  are  guilty,  do  your 
duty.  Display  the  manhood  and  the  bravery 
that  I  know  you  all  possess;  hold  down  the 
natural  affections  and  pity  of  your  natures 
for  the  men  whom  you  try,  and  remember  only 
your  high  duty  to  your  country — to  the  gener 
ations  that  shall  live  after  you.  Remember 
that  each  day  this  war  is  waged  in  this  coun 
try,  not  four  lives,  not  four  hundred,  but  thou 
sands  of  patriots  must  perish,  to  each  one  of 
whose  names  there  is  clinging  a  glorious  his 
tory;  a  history  of  toil,  of  self-sacrifice,  of 
endurance,  of  patience  and  long  suffering, 
of  unselfish  courage  and  devotion  to  their 
country;  think  that  each  day  these  struggles 
are  prolonged  must  go  down  hundreds  of  these 
brave  men.  If  you  make  an  example  of  these 
men  who  are  prolonging  these  struggles,  you 
are  shortening  this  desolating  contest,  and 
saving  the  lives  of  true  men.  The  sacrifice 
of  bad  men,  of  conspirators  and  traitors,  those 
men  that  sustain  the  armed  rebellion,  that 
give  its  cause  strength,  active  sympathy,  and 
encouragement — their  sacrifice,  I  say,  saves 
the  good,  the  true,  and  the  noble  of  the  na 
tion.  It  is  not  mercy  in  you  to  sit  here  and 
acquit  the  guilty.  It  is  cruelty  to  the  scarred 
veterans,  to  the  long-suffering  patriots,  who 
are  fighting  your  battles.  It  is  cruelty  to  their 
lonely  wives,  who  sit  with  aching  hearts  and 
with  throbbing  pulse,  clasping  their  little  ones 
to  their  hearts,  not  knowing  what  moment  the 
knock  at  their  door  shall  be  the  death-knell  at 
their  hearts.  Your  sympathy  for  traitors  and 
treason  makes  orphans,  makes  misery  in  this 
land  every-where.  It  makes  desolate,  and 
lonely,  and  sad,  the  pure,  the  good,  and  the 
true.  Therefore,  remember  that  justice  in 
your  place  is  mercy.  Nerve  your  hearts  to 
do  fearlessly  your  duty,  let  that  duty  come  in 
what  shape  it  may:  sink  the  frailties  of  the 
man,  and  rise  up,  grasping  a  few  of  the  attri 
butes  of  Omniscience. 

Remember,  I  charge  you,  that  every  fiber  of 
this  nation  is  quivering,  is  strained  to  its  ut 
most  tension,  to  secure  for  her  people,  and  for 
the  generations  to  come,  those  rights  which 
will  give  to  her  people  the  highest  development 
which  mankind  can  achieve.  Remember  that 
while  the  Revolution  gave  your  nation  birth, 
that  from  that  bloody  struggle  was  achieved 
national  existence,  through  this  second  bloody 
struggle,  through  this  second  baptism  of  fire 
and  sword,  she  is  to  achieve  immortality. 
Failing  in  this  struggle,  her  light  goes  out  in 
darkness,  and  with  it  the  hopes,  the  aspira 
tions,  the  rights  of  thirty  millions  of  people. 
Remember,  in  this  great  hour,  so  to  do  your 
duty,  that  when  the  Commander-in-Chief  of 
the  Universe  shall  sound  the  last  great  reveille, 
and  call  from  their  last,  long  sleep  the  unnum 
bered  hosts  of  the  earth,  you  can  point  to  this 
day's  work  as  having  been  well  done. 

Gentlemen,  I  have  done. 


OF   THE 


INITIAL  LETTERS  USED  IN  THE  RITUALS. 


O.  A.   K. 


K.  L. — Knight  Lecturer. 
W.  0.  C.— Warden  of  the  Outer  Court. 
K.  C.— Knight  Conductor. 
N. — Neophite. 
A.  B. — Ancient  Brother. 
K.  G.  N. — Knight  Guardian  North. 
K.  G.  S. — Knight  Guardian  South. 
G.  S. — Grand  Seignior. 

The  above  belongs  to  the  First  Degree  of  the 
Order  of  American  Knights. 

E.  K.  C.  W. — Excellent  Knight  Commander 
West. 


E.  K.— Excellent  Knight. 

E.  K.  G.  C.— Excellent  Knight  Grand  Com 
mander. 

0.  A.  K. — Order  of  American  Knights. 

The  above  belongs  to  the  Second  Degree  of 
the  Order  of  American  Knights. 

M.  E.  K. — Most  Excellent  Knight. 

M.  E.  D.  0.  A.  K.— Most  Excellent  Degree  of 
the  0.  A.  K. 

M.  E.  G.  C.— Most  Excellent  Grand  Com 
mander. 


O.  S.  L. 


VESTIBULE,    OR   SON  OF   LIBERTY    LESSON. 

V. — Vestibule. 

W.  0.  C.— Warden  Outer  Court. 

L.  V. — Lecturer  of  the  Vestibule. 

0.  C.— Outer  Court. 

T.— Temple. 

FIRST    DEGREE. 

0.  S.  L. — Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty. 
C.  T. — Conductor  of  the  Temple. 

W. —Warden. 

A.  B. — Ancient  Brother,  (second  officer   of 
First  Degree). 

A.  S.  L. — A  Son  of  Liberty. 

0.— Order. 

F.  G.  N.— Fellow  Guardian  North. 

F.  G.  S.— Fellow  Guardian  South. 

G.  S.— Grand  Seignior,  (first  officer  of  First 
Degree). 

F.  0.  S.  B.— Fellow  in  the  Order  of  the  Sons 
of  Liberty. 

SECOND    DEGREE,  OR    FIRST  CONCLAVE    DEGREE. 

K.  0.  S.  L.— Knight  Order  Sons  of  Liberty. 
K.  C. — Knight  Conductor. 
K.  C.  W. — Knight  Commander  West,  (second 
officer). 

1.  T. — Inner  Temple. 

C.  C. — Commander  Conclave. 
T.  D.— Temple  Degree. 

G.  C.— Grand  Council. 
S.  C. — Supreme  Council. 


K.  C.  C. — Knight  Commander  Conclave. 
I.  T.  of  0.— Inner  Temple  of  the  Order. 

THIRD    DEGREE,    OR    SECOND    CONCLAVE    DEGREE. 

M.  E.  K.  0.  S.  L.— Most  Excellent  Knight 
Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty. 

M.  E.  K.  C.  W.— Most  Excellent  Knight  Com 
mander  West. 

K.  C. — Knight  Conductor. 

M.  E.  K's.— Most  Excellent  Knights. 

M.  E.  K.  0.  S.  L.— Most  Excellent  Knighta 
Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty. 

M.  E.  G.  C.— Most  Excellent  Grand  Com 
mander. 

I — t  T. — Innermost  Temple. 

C. — Conclave. 

G.  C.  S.— Grand  Council  of  the  State. 

S.  C.  0.  S.  L. — Supreme  Council  Order  Sons 
of  Liberty. 

K.  C.  C. — Knight  Commander  Conclave. 

CONSTITUTION    STATE   COUNCIL. 

G.  C.— Grand  Council. 
G.  C. — Grand  Commander. 
Dep.  G.  C. — Deputy  Grand  Commander. 
G.  C.  S.  S.  C. — Grand  Counselor  S.  Supremo 
Council. 

g.  G.  C. — Supreme  Grand  Council. 

CONSTITUTION    OF   THE   SUPREME   COUNCIL. 

g.  GK  c. — Supreme  Grand  Council. 

295 


RITUAL  OF  THE  KNIGHTS  OF  THE  GOLDEN  CIRCLE. 


GOVERNMENT  EXHIBIT  C, 


W.  O.  G  Gives  *  *  * 

K.  L.  Who  cometh  ?  Who  cometh  ?  Who 
cometh  ? 

W.  0.  C.  A  man !  We  found  him  in  the 
dark  ways  of  the  sons  of  folly,  bound  in 
chains,  and  well  nigh  crushed  to  death  be 
neath  the  iron  heel  of  the  oppressor.  We 
have  brought  him  hither,  and  would  fain 
clothe  him  in  the  white  robes  of  Virtue, 
and  place  his  feet  in  the  straight  and  nar 
row  path  which  leads  to  Truth  and  Wisdom. 

K.  L.  Brothers !  The  purpose  ye  have  de 
clared  touching  this  stranger  is  most  wor 
thy;  let  him  advance  to  our  altar  by  the 
regular  steps;  instruct  him  in  our  chosen, 
solemn  attitude,  and  let  him  give  testimony 
of  that  which  is  in  him. 

K.  L.  DIVINE  ESSENCE  !  GOD  OF  OUR  FATH 
ERS,  whose  inspiration  moved  them  to 
mighty  deeds  of  valor  in  the  cause  of  Eter 
nal  Truth,  Justice  and  Human  Rights.  We, 
their  sons,  would  fain  recognize  the  same 
presence  and  inspiration  in  this  V.  of  the 
T.,  consecrated  to  the  principles  which  they 
inculcated  by  precept  and  by  example,  and 
defended  with  their  lives  and  their  sacred 
honor.  With  the  DIVINE  PRESENCE  let  holi 
est  memories  come,  like  incense  to  our 
souls,  and  exalt  them  with  emotions  worthy 
of  the  ceremonies  of  the  Supreme  occasion. 
Amen ! 

Man !  Thou  art  now  in  the  V.,  and,  if 
found  worthy,  will  hence  be  ushered  into 
the  consecrated  T.,  where  Truth  dwells 
amid  her  votaries ;  let  thy  soul  be  duly  con 
scious  of  her  presence,  and  go  forth  in  ex 
alted  desire  for  her  divine  influence.  Within 
those  sacred  precincts,  reverence  toward  the 
SUPREME  BEING,  Patriotism,  Love,  Charity 
and  good  fellowship  are  inculcated  and 
cherished.  Infidelity  to  God  or  our  country, 
nor  hatred,  nor  malice,  nor  uncharitable- 
ness,  nor  their  kindred  vices,  must  enter 
there.  "  Love  one  another,"  is  the  hail  of 
the  order  into  whose  inner  circle  thou 
wouldst  fain  be  inducted.  Direct  thy 
thoughts  within,  at  this  supreme  moment, 
and  declare,  as  thou  wouldst  answer  to  a 


good  conscience,  is  thy  soul  pure  and  fitted 
for  the  indwelling  of  Truth  ? 

Answer,  "yes,"  or  "  no." 

Is  thy  heart  quickened  with  genial  emo 
tions  toward  thy  fellow  man  ? 

Answer,  "yes,"  or  "no." 

It  is  well.  If  thou  hast  not  answered 
truly,  in  obedience  to  the  promptings  of  thy 
holier  nature,  so  shalt  thou  be  judged  in  the 
last  day,  when  the  secrets  of  thy  heart  shall 
be  revealed,  and  the  actions  and  purposes 
of  thy  life  on  earth  shall  return  to  thy  soul 
their  fruits  of  bitterness  or  joy  eternal.  I 
charge  thee,  if  thou  art  impelled  hither- 
ward  by  curiosity ;  if  thou  cherish  other 
purposes,  in  this  regard,  than  the  highest  and 
the  holiest  which  thy  heart  can  conceive,  it 
were  better  for  thee  that  thy  feet  had  never 
passed  the  threshold  of  our  outer  court. 
Our  faithful  and  beloved  brothers,  who  have 
conducted  thee  hither  into  this  presence, 
are  thy  sponsors.  A  fearful  responsibility 
is  upon  them !  If  thou  should  falsify  their 
assurances  to  us,  betray  their  trust,  or  stain 
thy  manhood  by  unworthy  actions,  it  will 
be  their  painful  duty  to  publish  thy  shame, 
so  that  thou  art  expelled,  and  ever  after  ex 
cluded  from  the  society  of  honorable  men. 

Brothers,  explain  your  obligations  as  spon 
sors  for  the  candidate. 

OBLIGATION    OF    THE    SPONSORS. 

"  We  do  solemnly  promise  and  under 
take,  amidst  the  inspiring  associations  of  our 
sacred  V.,  that  the  stranger  whom  we  have 
introduced  into  this  presence,  shall  in  all 
things  prove  himself  a  true  man.  That 
from  his  daily  walk  and  conversation  with 
his  fellows,  we  guarantee  his  worthiness  to 
be  inducted  into  the  sublime  mysteries  of 
our  beloved  order.  We  do  further  promise 
and  undertake  for  him,  that  he  shall  faith 
fully  keep  secret  whatsoever  shall  transpire 
in  this  presence.  We  do  further  promise, 
that  if  he  shall  be  found  worthy  thereto, 
and  shall  be  advanced  to  the  inner  T.  of  our 
order,  that  he  shall  reveal  nothing  which 
shall  therein  be  made  known  to  him  to  be 

297 


298 


TREASON    TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


preserved  an  inviolate  secret.  We  do  fur 
ther  promise  that,  in  case  he  shall  betray 
the  confidence  which  he  has  inspired  in  us, 
we  will  hold  it  our  bounrlen  duty  to  see  that 
he  is  expelled  from  the  association  of  all 
honorable  men.  This  we  do  promise  with 
the  approbation  of  the  DIVINE  SPIRIT. 
Amen ! 

Hast  thou  heard  and  considered  the 
words,  promises  and  obligations  of  thy  spon 
sors  ? 

Answer,  "Aye." 

Wilt  thou,  imploring  aid  from  the  DIVIN 
ITY  within  thee,  perform  unto  the  end  that 
which  they  have  promised  in  thy  behalf? 

Answer,  "  1  will." 

It  is  well !  God  help  thee  unto  the  end  ! 

It  is  now  my  duty  to  explain  the  princi 
ples  which  our  order  inculcates,  holding 
them  for  sublime  and  eternal  truths,  and 
which  we,  as  an  organized  fraternity,  and  as 
individuals,  aim  to  illustrate  in  our  lives 
and  conversations,  as  well  in  our  intercourse 
with  men  as  in  our  sacred  conclave.  Listen 
to  the  words  of  wisdom,  and  let  them  sink 
deep  into  thy  heart. 

DECLARATION    OF    PRINCIPLES. 

1st.  Essence,  Ethereal,  Eternal,  Supreme — 
by  us  called  GOD!  hath  created,  pervades 
and  controls  the  UNIVERSE!  dwells  in  man, 
and  is  the  DIVINITY  within  him ! 

Sponsors.  "Amen." 

2d.  All  men  are  endowed  by  the  Creator 
with  certain  rights — equal  only  so  far  as 
there  is  equality  in  the  rapacity  for  the  ap 
preciation,  enjoyment  ni.-d  exorcise  of  those 
rights — some  of  which  are  inaLenable,  while 
others  may,  by  voluntary  act,  or  consent,  be 
qualified,  suspended  or  relinquished,  for  the 
purpose  of  social  governmental  organiza 
tions,  or  may  be  taken  away  from  the  in 
dividual  by  the  supremacy  of  the  law  which 
he  himself  has  ordained,  in  conjunction 
with  his  fellows,  for  their  mutual  protection 
and  advancement  toward  perfect  civiliza 
tion. 

3d.  Government  arises  from  the  necessi 
ties  of  well-organized  society. 

4th.  Right  government  derives  its  sole 
authority  from  the  will  of  the  governed, 
expressly  declared. 

[The  majority  should  express  such  will,  in  the 
mode  which  the  unanimous  voice  shall  approve  ; 
always  guaranteeing  to  each  individual,  unless  he 
shall  have  been  restrained  by  the  laio,  the  privilege 
and  opportunity  to  make  known  his  opinions  and 
express  his  will,  in  regard  to  alt  matters  relating  or 
.pertaining  to  the  government.'} 

5th.  The  grand  purpose  of  the  govern 
ment  is  the  welfare  of  the  governed ;  its 
success  is  measured  by  the  degree  of  pro 
gress  which  the  people  shall  have  attained 
toward  the  most  exalted  civilization. 

6th.  Government  founded  upon  the  prin 
ciples  enunciated  in  the  foregoing  proposi 
tions,  is  designated  "Democracy."  [The  divi 


sion  of  Territory  where  it  exists,  is  called,  usually, 
a  "  REPUBLIC,"  sometimes  a  "  STATE."] 

7th.  Reflection,  observation  and  expe 
rience,  seem  to  have  established  in  the 
minds  of  wise  and  impartial  men,  the  con 
clusion  that  "  Democrat/,"  properly  organized 
.ipon  the  great  principles  which  our  Revolu* 
ionary  ancestors — patriots  and  sages — held, 
nculcated  and  defended,  best  achieves  the 
grand  and  benificent  ends  of  human  gov 
ernment. 

8th.  The  Government  organized  and  ex- 
sting  in  the  original  Thirteen  States  of 
North  America,  when  they  had  severally 
nd  unitedly  renounced  their  allegiance  to 
:he  Government  of  Great  Britain,  and  dis 
solved  their  former  colonial  relations,  we 
regard  as  the  wisest,  and  best  adapted  to 
the  nature  and  character  of  the  people  in 
habiting  the  Continent  of  North  America 
at  the  present  dayl!  Under  the  benign  in 
fluences  of  that  Government,  a  nation  has 
arisen  and  attained  a  degree  of  power  and 
splendor,  which  has  no  parallel  in  the  his 
tory  of  the  human  race. 

9th.  The  Government  designated  "  the 
United  States  of  America,"  which  shaH 
blazon  the  historic  page,  and  shed  its  light 
along  the  path  of  future  ages,  was  the  tran 
scendent  conception  and  mighty  achieve 
ment  of  wisdom,  enlightened  patriotism, 
and  virtue,  which  appear  to  have  passed 
from  earth  amidst  the  fading  glories  of  the 
Golden  Era,  which  they  illustrated  with  im 
mortal  splendor.  That  Government  was 
created  originally  by  thirteen  free,  sovereign,  and 
independent  States,  for  their  mutual  benefit, 
to  administer  the  affairs  of  their  common 
interests  and  concerns;  being  endowed 
with  the  powers,  dignity,  and  supremacy, 
and  no  further  or  other,  which  are  distinctly 
specified  and  warranted,  and  conferred  by 
the  strict  letter  of  the  immortal  compact, 
"The  Constitution  of  the  United  States." 

Sponsors — Amen ! 

Man!  under  the  influence  of  sublime 
Truth  !  amid  the  inspiration  of  the  Divine 
Presence !  which  thou  didst  invoke  on  thy 
approach  to  this  Altar,  how  wilt  thou  re 
spond  to  the  declarations  which  thou  hast 
just  heard  ? 

Answer  as  to  thy  conscience,  aye !  or  no ! 
for  so  it  will  be  recorded. 

Amen ! 

Place  thyself  in  the  solemn  attitude  of 
invocation  which  thou  didst  first  assume 
before  this  Altar,  and  repeat  after  me : 

I ?  fully  comprehending  and 

appreciating  the  Declaration  of  Principles 
which  I  have  just  heard  pronounced,  hold 
them  for  truth — to  cherish  them  in  my 
heart  of  hearts — to  inculcate  them  amongst 
my  fellow  men — to  illustrate  them,  as  far 
as  in  me  lies,  in  my  daily  walk  and  conver 
sation,  and,  if  needs  be,  will  defend  them 
with  my  life.  I  appeal  to  that  Divine  Es 
sence  which  created  and  rules  the  Universe, 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


299 


and  dwells  in  me.  to  witness  the  sincerity 
of  my  vows.  I  do  solemnly  promise,  that, 
should  I,  from  my  own  volition,  or  from 
adjudged  umvorthiness,  advance  no  further 
than  this  V.  of  the  T.,  consecrated  to  the 
rites  and  mysteries  of  the  brotherhood,  to 
which  I  purpose  to  be  inducted,  I  will  never 
reveal,  or  make  known,  to  any  person  or 
persons,  by  sign  or  signs,  word  or  words, 
nor  any  other  manner,  the  ceremonies  in 
which  I  have  just  taken  part,  nor  the 
names  nor  persons  of  those  who  have  parti 
cipated  with  me,  nor  any  part,  nor  any  one 
of  them,  nor  any  single  word  nor  thing, 
which  I  have  heard,  or  have  seen  herein ; 
nor  any  purpose  which  I  have  learned  or 
conjectured  as  the  leading  purpose  of  the 
brotherhood  whose  Inner  Temple,  I  desire  to 
enter.  To  the  faithful  performance  of  all 
which,  in  presence  of  these  witnesses,  my 
worthy  Sponsors,  I  pledge  my  most  sacred 
honor !  Amen ! 

Friend  !  Thou  art  well  and  truly  informed 
touching  the  grand  principles  of  an  order, 
whose  highest  purpose  is  to  teach,  cherish, 
and  inculcate  those  principles  by  precept 
and  by  example,  and  to  defend  them  where 
soever  assailed ;  whose  other  purpose  is  to 
love  and  cherish  one  another,  and  to  relieve 
the  worthy  in  their  distress,  giving  our  first 
care  to  our  own  brother,  and  to  those  who 
are  nearest  and  dearest  to  him.  Remem 
ber,  that  as  a  fraternity,  we  inculcate 
neither  sectarianism  or  partisanism,  only 
demanding  unity  in  sentiment  touching 
immutable  principles. 

(Here  cnddh  the  lesson  of  the  V.) 

(Instruct  in  the  sign.) 

Dost  them  now  sincerely  desire  to  ad- 
van^e,  or  shall  our  worthy  brothers  conduct 
thee  to  the  place  where  thou  last  saw  the 
light  of  heaven,  and  return  thee  again  to 
the  path  from  which  thy  feet  have  been  so 
lately  turned  aside  ?  Listen  to  the  words 
of  thy  Sponsors. 

Sponsors.  I  would  advance  onward  and 
upward,  even  to  the  Temple  where  Truth 
dwells  serenely.  I  would  fain  worship  at 
her  shrine  through  all  of  life  to  me  on 
earth. 

Friend!     Sayest  thou  so  ? 

Answer.    "Aye." 

So  be  it.     Thou  shalt  advance ! 

Thy  Sponsors  will  deliver  thee  to  the  W. 
of  the  T..  who  will  conduct  thee  to  the  Most 
Ancient  and  the  Sages,  who  will  instruct 
thee  in  wisdom,  and  will  give  unto  thee  a 
new  name. 

May  not  their  words  fall  upon  ears  which 
can  not  hear !  Nor  their  hands  fall  upon  a 
head  that  will  not  learn  ! 

Thou  wilt  now  pass  to  the  sacred  pre 
cincts,  where  thou  shalt  be  hailed  brother ! 
See  that  thou  return  hither  a  wiser  and  a 
better  man ! 

Conduct  our  Neophyte  to  the  Most  An 
cient  and  our  Sages.  See  to  it  that  ye  make 


his  pathway  smooth.  Let  the  air  be  redo 
lent  with  incense,  and  let  it  breathe  sweet 
est  music  upon  his  ear,  so  that  the  pursuit 
of  knowledge  shall  be  to  him  a  continual 
joy  and  inspiration. 


W.  0.  C.  Gives  *  *  * 

K.  C.  Who  cometh?  Whocometh?  Who 
cometh  ? 

W.  A  N.,  whom  our  worthy  brother  L., 
of  the  V.,  commanded  us  to  deliver  to  the 
C.  of  the  T.  He  is  from  the  outer  dark 
ness,  and  would  journey  east  for  light  and 
instruction. 

K.  C.  He  should  have  received  his  first 
lesson  in  the  V.  I  would  be  assured  of  his 
proficiency. 

Let  the  N.  advance  the  signs  in  which  he 
has  been  instructed. 

K.  C.  'Tis  well.  I  will  conduct  thee  to 
the  A.  B. 

A.  B.  Who  cometh?  Who  cometh?  WTho 
cometh  ? 

K.  C.  AN.,  whom  our  worthy  brother  W. 
has  brought  hither  by  command  of  our 
worthy  L.  of  the  V.  I  have  proved  him, 
and  found  him  duly  proficient  in  the 
lesson  he  has  received.  He  fain  would 
journey  east  for  instruction. 

A.  B.  His  desire  shall  be  gratified.  But  it 
is  my  duty  to  admonish  him  touching  the 
trials  and  perils  he  needs  must  encounter, 
and  to  demand  of  him  a  solemn  obligation, 
first  giving  him  assurance  that  such  obliga 
tion  requires  of  him  nothing  inconsistent 
with  his  duty  to  GOD!  to  his  country  !  to  his 
family  !  or  to  himself.  N.,  with  this  assu 
rance,  are  you  now  willing  to  take  such  an 
obligation  ? 

N.  I  am. 

A.  B.  Then  place  yourself  in  the  attitude 
in  which  you  plighted  your  solemn  vows  in 
the  V.,  holding  in  your  right  hand  the  sa 
cred  emblem  of  our  order. 

OBLIGATION   OF   THE  N. 


-,  in  the  presence  of  God! 


I, 

and  many  witnesses,  do  solemnly  declare, 
that  I  do  herein,  freely,  and  in  the  light  of 
a  good  conscience,  renew  the  solemn  vows 
which  I  plighted  in  the  V.  I  do  further 
promise  that  I  will  never  reveal,  nor  make 
known,  to  any  man,  woman  or  child,  any 
thing  which  my  eyes  may  behold,  or  any 
word  which  my  ears  may  hear,  within  this 
sacred  T.,  nor  in  any  other  T.,  nor  in  any 
other  place  where  the  brotherhood  may  b^ 
assembled.  That  I  will  never  speak  of,  nor 
intimate  any  purpose  or  purposes  of  this 
order,  whether  contemplated  or  determined, 
to  any  one  except  to  a  brother  of  this  or 
der,  whom  I  know  to  be  such.  That  I  will 
never  exhibit  any  or  either  of  the  emblems 
or  insignia  of  the  order,  except  by  express 
authority  granted  to  that  end,  and  that  I 


300 


TREASON    TRIALS    AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


will  never  explain  their  use  or  signification  |  within  or  come  from  without !     I  do  further 

promise  that  I  will  always  recognize  and 
respond  to  the  hail  of  a  brother,  when  it 
shall  be  made  in  accordance  with  the  in 
structions  and  injunctions  of  the  order,  and 
not  otherwise.  1  do  further  promise  that, 
with  GOD'S  help,  I  will  ever  demean  myself 
toward  my  fellow  man,  and  especially  to 
ward  the  brotherhood,  as  becometh  a  true 
man.  1  do  further  promise  that,  should  1 
cease  to  be  a  member  of  this  order,  either 
of  my  own  volition  or  by  expulsion,  I  will 
hold  and  preserve  inviolate  my  solemn 
vows  and  promises  herein  declared,  as  well 
as  while  1  am  in  full  fellowship.  All  this  I 
do  solemnly  promise  and  swear  sacredly  to 
observe,  perform  and  keep,  with  a  full 
knowledge  and  understanding,  and  with 
my  full  assent,  that  the  penalty  which  will 
follow  a  violation  of  any  or  either  of  these, 
my  solemn  vows,  will  be  a  shameful  death ! 
while  my  name  shall  be  consigned  to  in 
famy,  while  this  sublime  order  shall  survive 


to  any  one  not  a  brother  of  this  order, 
whom  I  know  to  be  such,  under  any  pre 
tense  whatsoever,  neither  by  persuasion  nor 
by  coercion.  That  I  will  never  reveal  nor 
make  known,  to  any  man,  woman  or  child, 
any  or  either  of  the  signs,  hails,  passwords, 
watchwords,  initials  nor  initial  letters  belong 
ing  to  this  order,  neither  by  voice,  nor  by 
gesture,  attitude  or  motion  of  the  body,  nor 
:uiy  member  of  the  body;  nor  by  intima- 
t  on  through  the  instrumentality  of  any 
thing  animate  or  inanimate,  or  object  in  the 
heavens,  or  on  the  earth,  or  above  the  earth, 
except  to  prove  a  man  if  he  be  a  brother, 
or  to  communicate  with  a  brother  whom  I 
shall  have  first  duly  proved  or  know  to  be 


such.     That  1   will    never    pronounce 
name  of  this  order  in  the  hearing  of 


the 
any 


man,  woman  or  child,  except  to  a  brother 
of  this  order,  whom  I  know  to  be  such. 
That  I  will  ever  have  in  my  most  holy  keep 
ing  each  and  every  secret  of  this  order. 


which  may  be  confided  to  me  by  a  brother, !  the  wrecks  of  time,  and  even  until  the  last 
either  within  or  without  the  T.,  and  rather  faithful  brother  shall  have  passed  from 
than  reveal  which,  I  will  consent  to  any  earth  to  his  service  in  the  Temple  not  made 
sacrifice,  even  unto  death  by  torture.  I  do  fur-  with  hands !  Divine  Essence  !  and  ye  men 


s  ther  promise  that  I  will  never  recommend  for 
membership  to  this  order  any  man  who  is 
not  a  citizen  of  an  American  State,  except 
by  dispensation  to  that  end,  by  the  compe 
tent  authority  of  the  order — citizenship  al 
ways  resulting  from  nativity,  or  from  due  pro 


of  Earth !  witness  the  sincerity  of  my  soul 
touching  these,  my  vows  ! 


Amen  ! 


CHARGE. 


A.   B.   Neophyte,  thy  progress  from  the 


of  law  in  such  case  provided — neither  outer  darkness  to  this  presence,  and  thy 
any  person  who  has  not  attained  the  age  of  |  proficiency  in  the  sublime  lessons,  which  have 
twenty-one  years ;  neither  a  man  unsound  or  been  given  tsfcee 


infirm  in  body  or  in  mind — such  as  a  crip 
ple  or  an  idiot;  neither  any  one  of  African 
descent,  whether  slave  or  freeman  ;  neither 
an  avowed  and  acknowledged  atheist; 
neither  a  person  of  bad  repute.  That  I 
will  ever  cherish  toward  each  and  every 
member  of  this  order,  fraternal  regard  and 
fellowship;  that  I  will  ever  aid  a  worthy 
brother  in  distress,  if  in  my  power  to  do 
so;  that  I  will  never  do  wrong,  knowingly, 
to  a  brother,  nor  permit  him  to  suffer 
wrong  at  the  hand  of  another,  if  it  shall  be 
in  my  power  to  warn  him  of  danger  or  pre 
vent  the  wrong.  I  do  further  promise  that 
I  will,  at  all  times,  if  needs  be,  take  up 
arms  in  the  cause  of  the  oppressed — in  my 


n  given  fchee  to  learn,  gives  assurance  that 
there  is  one  more  votary  to  eternal  Truth, 
rescued  from  the  throng  which  wear  the 
galling  chains  of  Error.  Thy  journey  is 
well  nigh  accomplished.  Fain  would  I  tell 
thee  that  thy  trials  are  passed,  but  it  is 
not  so ;  yet,  I  will  give  thee  such  caution 
and  admonition  as  will  serve  thee  much. 
The  Sons  of  Folly  will  beset  thy  path,  and 
aim  to  turn  thee  back  to  thy  dark  haunts; 
will  scoff  and  buffet  thee;  peradventure, 
will  seek  thy  life.  Then  put  thy  trust  in 
GOD  and  TRUTH.  Still,  thy  journey  leadeth 
due  East,  until  thou  art  hailed  by  the  G.  S., 
who  will  further  instruct  thee,  welcome  thee, 
brother,  in  our  Inner  Court,  and  give  unto 
thee  a  new  name.  Beware,  lest  thou  bear 


country  first   of  all — against   any    Monarch, !  thee  toward  the  North  too  far,  and  lose  thy 


Prince,  Potentate,  Power  or  Government 
usurped,  which  may  be  found  in  arms,  and 
waging  war  against  a  people  or  peoples,  who 
are  endeavoring  to  establish,  or  have  inau- 


way,  and  perish  amid  the  moaning  pines, 
which  crown  the  rugged  hills,  sighing  ever 
in  rough  harmony  to  the  icy  blasts,  or  amid 
the  hoary,  moss-clad  rocks,  whose  yawning 


guratecl,  a  Government  for  themselves  of  I  chasms  open  wide  and  bottomless  to  the 
their  own  free  choice,  in  accordance  with,  hapless  wanderer.  As  well  take  heed,  lest 
and  founded  upon,  ike  eternal  principles  of  the  balmy  zephyrs  from  the  golden  South 
Truth  !  which  I  have  sworn  in  the  V.,  and  entice  thee  too  far  thither.  There  the 
now  in  this  presence  do  swear,  to  maintain  gentle  winds  will  cool  thy  fevered  temples, 
inviolate,  and  defend  with  my  life.  This  I  and  awake  thy  senses  in  delirious  joy ;  yet 
do  promise,  without  reservation  or  evasion  '  they  bear  too  oft  the  deadly  malaria,  and 
of  mind ;  without  regard  to  the  name,  sta-  j  minister  to  death  in  his  awful  revelry.  We 
tion,  condition  or  destination  of  the  invad-Jhave  a  trusty  Brother  Guardian  on  either 
ing  or  coercion  power,  whether  it  shall  arise  :  side  thy  way,  who,  true  and  constant  at 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


301 


their  posts,  perchance  may  hail  thee,  when 
thou  wilt  tarry,  should  he  bid  thee,  receive 
what  he  shall  offer,  and  give  thy  earnest 
heed  to  all  his  words.  Remember,  the  only 
path  which  leads  where  Truth  and  Wisdom 
dwells  together,  their  fairest  sister,  Vir 
tue,  traced.  Jt  leadeth  onward,  upward, 
straight.  It  is  paved  with  gems,  and  pearls, 
and  gold.  It  is  bordered  with  perennial 
flowers,  whose  perfumes  all  thy  senses  en 
trance.  Neophyte,  be  thy  watchword — On 
ward!  Onward!  Onward! 

K.  G.  N. 

K.  G.  N.  Who  cometh  ?  who  cometh?  who 
cometh?  Advance! 

K.  C.  A  N.,  by  command  of  our  A.  B. 
in  the  West,  journeying  toward  the  East  to 
receive  light  and  instruction. 

K.  G.  N.  Then  he  has  left  the  straight 
path,  and  has  lost  his  way.  Danger  is  in 
every  step  he  advances.  1  am  from  the  far 
North  not  long  since.  The  barren  wastes 
are  white  with  the  bleaching  bones  of  such 
as  he,  and  the  yawning  chasms  send  up  an 
horrid  stench  from  Death's  late  carnival ! 
Bid  him  turn  back.  He  has  forgotten  the 
instructions  of  our  A.  B.  Was  he  not 
charged  to  follow  the  straight  and  narrow 
path  which  Virtue  has  traced  ? 

K.  C.  True !  Wre  entered  upon  the 
straight  path,  but  ere  we  had  proceeded  far, 
the  Sons  of  Folly  beset  us,  and  drove  us 
from  our  course  with  violence.  We  were 
sorely  bruised.  We  were  bewildered,  and 
lost  our  way.  Wilt  thou  direct  us  hence  ? 

K.  G.  N.  I  will ;  but  first  I  must  prove 
him,  that  I  may  know  by  what  right  he 
claims  my  care  and  assistance. 

K.  C.  Lo !  He  hath  a  sign. 

K.  G.  N.  'Tis  well.     Hath  tie  a  password? 

K.  C.  He  has ;  and  will  give  it. 

K.  G.  N.  'Tis  well.     Thy  watchword? 

N.  Onward!  Onward!  Onward! 

K.  G.  N.  'Tis  well.  Tarry  and  refresh 
thyselves ;  then  depart  due  South.  Shouldst 
thou  cross  the  path  *hou  seekest,  and  reach 
the  camp  of  our  G.  in  the  Soutlx,  he  will 
further  instruct  thee.  Thy  watchword  still — 
Onward !  Onward !  Onward  ! 

K.  G.  s. 

K.  G.  S.  Who  cometh  ?  Who  cometh  ? 
Who  cometh  ?  Strangers,  advance.  De 
clare  thy  way  and  purpose. 

K.  C.  I  come  with  this  N.  from  our 
worthy  A.  B.  in  the  West,  who  commanded 
us  to  journey  due  East  to  the  M.  E.  G.  S. 
and  the  Sages  for  light  and  instruction.  He 
charged  us  to  follow  the  straight  path.  We 
had  not  journeyed  far,  when  we  were  beset 
by  the  Factionists,  Fanatics,  and  Sons  of 
Error  and  Folly,  who  did  wound  and  bruise 
us  sorely,  because  we  would  not  turn  back 
with  them  to  their  dark  and  devious  ways. 
In  brief,  we  lost  our  path,  and  would  have 
perished  amid  the  snows  of  the  icy  North, 


or  sunk  into  the  yawning  chasms  of  the 
rocks,  but  that  the  worthy  K.  G.  N.  did  hail 
us  as  we  passed  his  tent,  and  gave  us  wine 
and  bread,  instructed  us  in  wisdom,  and 
turned  our  faces  hitherward.  Wilt  thou 
show  us  our  path  ? 

K  G.  S.  I  will.  But  first  I  would  prove 
thy  friend.  1  know  thee  well  for  a  true 
man.  Let  the  Neophyte  advance  the  sign. 

K.  G.  S.  'Tis  well.     Hath  he  a  password? 

K.  C.  He  has. 

K.  G.  S.  Bid  him  give  it  me. 

'Tis  well.     Thy  watchword  ? 

N.  Onward  !  Onward !  Onward ! 

K.  G.  S.  'Tis  well.  Tarry  and  refresh 
yourselves,  and  I  will  instruct  you  further. 
Happily,  thou  didst  approach  my  tent,  else 
thou  and  thy  friend  might  have  perished 
together  in  the  trackless  fen.  or  perchance 
thy  limbs  had  wearied,  and  thy  heart  be 
come  faint  in  thy  weary  way  under  the 
scorching  rays  of  the  meridian  sun;  or  in 
haled  the  rank  poison,  which,  distilled  in 
the  cool  air  of  night,  swathes  the  heated 
brow  in  the  death  camp,  which  no  tender 
hand  can  wipe  away ;  or,  peradventure,  the 
soft  gales,  laden  with  perfume,  and  breath 
ing  the  syren's  entrancing  melody,  had 
lulled  thy  soul  to  rest  in  inglorious  ease  to 
destruction.  Not  yet  is  thy  Neophyte  fitted 
for  the  field  of  labor.  His  soul  must  be 
attuned  to  the  harmony  of  great  thoughts, 
to  the  conception  and  achievement  of 
mighty  deeds  and  purposes.  Our  brothers 
there  are  doing  battle  in  the  cause  of  eter 
nal  Truth.  They  have  no  place  for  Neo 
phytes.  When  he  shall  have  reached  our 
sacred  T.,  whose  spires  are  glistening  in  the 
dawning  rays  of  Truth's  resplendent  sun ; 
when  he  shall  have  drunk  deep  from  the 
fountains  of  Wisdom,  which  send  forth 
their*sti8fims  to  cherish  and  gladden  noble 
manhood^  then  shall  he  don  our  sacred 
armor,  rush  to  the  deadly  breach  where 
faction's  darling  hosts  are  gathered,  and 
waiving  aloft  our  holy  banner,  consecrated 
to  Freedom,  Truth  and  Virtue,  shall  bear  it 
on  to  victory,  or  die  beneath  its  folds.  Con 
duct  him  again  to  the  straight  and  narrow 
path,^.hence  onward  due  East  to  our  G.  S., 
and  me  Sages  of  the  T.  Cheer  his  heart ; 
beguile  his  way  with  tales  of  dai^ng  deeds. 
Let  the  watchword  be  ever  and  ever — On 
ward!  Onward!  Onward! 

G.   s. 

K.  C.  We  have  attained  the  end  cf  cm 

journey.      The    W s    of    the 

Tower  have  sounded  the  alarm. 
the  attitude  in  which  thou  wert  instinct  d 
in  the  V.  Fall  upon  thy  knee,  in  the  j;c  s 
ture  which  best  expresses  humiliation.  He 
that  humbleth  himself  shall  be  exalted. 
Thou  shalt  rise  again  to  welcome  the  glud 
light  which  glows  resplendent  around  oui 
holy  place,  where  Truth,  Virtue,  Wisdom, 
dwell  together,  and  their  altars  ever  burn 


302 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


with  the  incense-offerings  of  their  vota 
ries. 

(Kneels  upon  his  left  knee.) 

G.  S.  Who  cometh?  Who  cometh? 
Who  cometh  ? 

K.  C.  M.  E.  G.  S.,  I  have  brought  a  N. 
He  is  from  the  West,  and  hath  journeyed 
East  for  instruction  in  Truth  and  Wisdom. 
He  is  a  man. 

G.  S.  A  man!  sayest  thou?  Methinks 
that  posture  becometh  not  a  man  formed 
in  the  image  of  his  Creator.  It  doth  imply 
debasemen  t — servitude. 

K.  C.  Servitude,  M.  E.  G.  S.,  but  not  de 
basement.  Two  brothers  of  our  sacred 
order  found  him  bound  in  chains,  and  upon 
his  neck  a  heavy  yoke,  Our  worthy 
brothers,  as  is  their  wont,  did  break  his 
fetters,  cast  away  his  galling  yoke,  and 
brought  him  to  our  V.,  where  he  proved 
himself  a  true  man.  So  did  our  A.  B.  prove 
him,  and  gave  to  him  our  sacred  watch 
word.  So  did  our  worthy  G s  N.  and  S. 

prove  him  by  our  signs,  and  by  his  pro 
ficiency  in  the  lessons  of  our  order.  Still. 
M.  E.  G.  S.,  he  serveth. 

G.  S.  Serveth  ? '   Whom  ?     What  ? 

K.  C.  GOD!  and  his  country ! 

G.  S.  'Tis  well.  Such  service  well  becom 
eth  a  man.  By  the  authority  vested  in  me 
by  the  C.  S.  of  our  order,  I  give  him  welcome 
to  our  sacred  B.  Pronounce  the  name  by 
which  he  is  known  amongst  his  fellow  men. 
I  would  give  him  a  new  name. 

[Instruct.'] 

INVOCATION. 


OPENING. 

DIVINE  ESSENCE!  We  would  recognize 
Thy  Presence  in  our  T.,  consecrated  to 
Truth!  Let  holiest  memories  come,  like 
incense,  to  our  souls ;  memories  of  our  an 
cestors'  virtues,  and  their  glorious  deeds  in 
the  holy  cause  of  Truth,  Justice,  and  the 
Rights  of  Man!  inspiring  emotions  !  holy! 
exalted!  worthy  of  the  ceremonies  of  this 
sacred  place.  May  each  heart  in  this  pres 
ence  to  other  beat  in  unison,  with  genial 
sympathies,  while  our  souls,  as  one,  glow 
with  the  emotions  of  our  holy  nature. 4  May 
our  cherished  brotherhood  so  live,  that  when 
we  have  done  with  earthly  things,  we  may 
be  hailed  for  service  in  the  Temple  not 
made  with  hands,  ETERNAL,  in  the  heavens. 
Amen  ! 

CLOSING. 

Divine  Essence!  With  grateful  hearts 
we  recognize  the  Holy  Presence,  Inspiration, 
and  Guidance,  during  the  ceremonies  and 
deliberations  of  the  occasion.  Deign  to  go 
with  us  to  our  several  homes — to  our  cham 
bers  of  repose — so  shall  gentle  slumbers 
renew  our  manhood's  strength,  for  better 
service  on  earth;  the  asperities  of  our 
grosser  nature  be  subdued  and  chastened  ; 


welcomed  for  service  in  the  Inner  Temple 
there  by  the  hail :   u  Well  done."     Amen  I 

ORDER    OF   BUSINESS. 

1.  Ceremonies  of  Opening. 

2.  Reading  and   approval  of  minutes  of 
preceding  meeting  and  reports  of  Secretary 
and  Treasurer. 

3.  Balloting  for  Candidates  recommended 
at  a  former  meeting. 

4.  Induction  of  Candidates. 

5.  Reading  and  consideration  of  commu 
nications  from  other  organizations. 

6.  Nomination  of  Candidates  and  refer 
ence  to  Committee. 

7.  Propositions  for  the  good  of  the  Order, 
including  immediate   purposes  and   plans, 
and  their  consideration  and  discussion. 

8.  Lecture. 

9.  Information  concerning  the  condition 
of  members,    whether  any  one  is  sick  or 
in  distress,  requiring  aid  and  sustenance. 


S.  L. 
v. 

W.  0.  C.  Gives    *    *    * 

L.  V.  Who  cometh? 

W.  0.  C.  A  citizen  we  found  in  the 
hands  of  the  sons  of  despotism,  bound  and 
well  nigh  crushed  to  death  beneath  their 
oppressions.  We  have  brought  him  hither, 
and  would  now  restore  to  him  the  blessings 
of  Liberty  and  Law. 

L.  V.  Brothers,  the  purpose  ye  have  de 
clared,  touching  this  stranger,  is  most 
worthy.  Let  him  advance  to  the  altar  by 
the  regular  steps;  instruct  him  in  our 
chosen  solemn  attitude,  and  let  him  give 
heed  to  the  words  which  shall  be  spoken. 

INVOCATION. 

L.  V.  God  of  our  Fathers,  whose  inspira 
tion  moved  them  to  deeds  of  valor,  in  the 
cause  of  Eternal  Truth,  Justice  and  Equal 
Rights;  we,  their  sons,  now  invoke  Thy 
Divine  Presence,  in  this  V.  of  the  T.,  con 
secrated  to  the  principles  which  they  incul 
cated  by  precept,  and  by  example,  and  de 
fended  with  their  lives.  Bless  our  coun 
try,  and  restore  and  protect  her  liberties. 
Amen. 

L.  V.  Citizen,  thou  art  now  in  the  V.,  and 
if  found  worthy,  will  be  hence  ushered  into 
the  consecrated  T.,  within  whose  precincts, 
reverence  toward  the  Supreme  Being,  pa 
triotism,  peace,  charity  and  good  fellowship 
are  inculcated  and  cherished.  Direct  thy 
thoughts  within  at  this  moment,  and  de 
clare,  as  thou  wouldst  answer  to  a  good  con 
science,  art  thou  ready  ? 


Response.  I  am. 
L.  V.  It  is  well! 


I  charge  thee  that  if 


thou  art  impelled  hitherward  by  curiosity; 
our  souls  fitted  for  the  upper  sphere,  and  if  thou  cherish   other  purposes  in  this  re- 


TREASON    TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


303 


gard,  than  the  highest  and  holiest  thy  heart 
can  conceive,  it  were  better  for  thee  that 
thy  feet  had  never  passed  the  threshold  of 
our  0.  C.  Our  faithful  and  well-beloved 
brothers,  who  have  conducted  thee  hither 
into  this  presence,  are  thy  Sponsors  —  a  fear 
ful  responsibility  is  upon  them.  If  thou 
shouldst  betray  their  trust,  or  stain  thy 
manhood  by  unworthy  actions,  it  will  be 
their  solemn  duty  to  publish  thy  shame,  so 
that  thou  shalt  be  expelled,  and  ever  after 
excluded  from  the  society  of  honorable 
men. 

Brothers,  hear  your  obligations  as  Spon 
sors  for  the  candidate. 

OBLIGATION    OF    SPONSORS. 

We  do  solemnly  promise  and  undertake 
that  the  stranger,  whom  we  have  introduced 
into  this  presence,  shall,  in  all  things,  prove 
himself  a  true  man;  that  from  his  daily 
walk  and  conversation  with  his  brethren, 
we  guarantee  his  worthiness  to  be  inducted 
into  the  mysteries  of  this  society.  'We  do 
further  promise  and  undertake  for  him, 
that  he  shall  faithfully  keep  secret  whatso 
ever  shall  transpire  in  this  presence;  and 
that  in  case  he  shall  betray  the  confidence 
which  he  has  inspired  in  us,  we  will  hold  it 
our  bounden  duty  to  aid  in  his  expulsion 
from  all  association  with  Jponorable  men. 


L.  V.  Hast  thou  heard  and  considered  the 
obligation  of  thy  Sponsors  ? 

Answer.  I  have. 

L.  V.  Wilt  thou  well  and  truly  perform 
unto  the  end,  that  which  they  have  pro 
mised  on  thy  behalf? 

Ans.  I  will. 

L.  V.  It  is  well.  It  is  now  my  duty  to 
explain  the  principles  which  our  society  in 
culcates,  and  which  we,  as  a  fraternity  and 
as  individuals,  aim  to  illustrate  in  our  lives 
and  conversation. 

DECLARATION    OF    PRINCIPLES. 

1st.  God  hath  created  and  controls  the 
Universe. 

2d.  All  men  are  endowed  by  the  Creator 
with  certain  rights  —  equal  so  far  as  there  is 
equality  in  the  capacity  for  the  apprecia 
tion,  enjoyment  and  exercise  of  those 
rights  —  some  of  which  are  inalienable, 
while  others  may,  by  voluntary  act  or  con 
sent,  be  qualified,  suspended,  or  relinquish 
ed,  for  the  purposes  of  social  and  govern 
mental  organizations. 

3d.  Government  arises  from  the  necessi 
ties  of  society,  and  rightful  government  de 
rives  its  sole  authority  from  the  will  of  the 
governed,  its  chief  end  being  their  wel 
fare. 

4th.  The  governments  organized  and  ex 
isting  in  the  original  thirteen  States  of 
North  America,  after  they  had  severally 
and  unitedly  renounced  their  allegiance  to 
the  Government  of  Great  Britain,  we  re 
gard  as  the  wisest  and  best  adapted  to  the 


nature  and  character  of  the  people  of  the 
United  States. 

5th.  That  government  was  established 
originally  by  thirteen,  free,  sovereign  and  inde 
pendent  States,  "in  order  to  form  a  more  per 
fect  Union,  to  establish  justice,  to  insure 
domestic  tranquillity,  provide  for  the  com 
mon  defense,  promote  the  general  welfare, 
and  secure  the  blessings  of  liberty  to  the 
people  thereof,  and  their  posterity;  being 
intrusted  with  the  powers  and  supremacy,'' 
and  no  further  or  other,  which  are  specifi 
cally  granted  in  the  compact,  entitled  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States,  strictly  con 
strued. 

L.  V.  Dost  thou  assent  to  the  declaration 
of  principles  which  thou  hast  just  heard  ? 

Ans.  1  do. 

L.  V.  Present  thyself,  then,  in  the  atti 
tude  of  invocation  which  thou  didst  first 
assume  before  this  altar,  and  receive  thy 
obligation. 

OBLIGATION. 

I  ^  fully  comprehending  the 

declaration  of  principles  which  I  have  just 
heard  pronounced,  hold  them  for  truth — to 
cherish  them  in  my  heart — to  illustrate 
them,  as  far  as  in  me  lies,  in  my  daily  walk 
and  conversation,  and  to  defend  them  with 
my  life.  I  do  solemnly  promise,  that  I  will 
never  reveal  or  make  known  to  any  person 
or  persons,  by  sign  or  word,  or  in  any  man 
ner,  the  ceremonies  in  which  I  have  just 
taken  part,  nor  the  names  nor  persons  of 
those  who  have  participated  with  me,  nor 
any  purpose  which  I  have  learned  or  con 
jectured  as  any  part  of  the  object  of  this 
society;  and  that  I  will,  without  hesitation 
or  delay,  perform  whatever  may  be  right 
fully  required  of  me  by  the  duly  constituted 
authorities  of  the  society.  To  the  faithful 
performance  of  all  which,  in  presence  of 
these  witnesses,  I  pledge  my  most  sacred 
honor.  Amen. 

(Instruct,  &c.) 

O.  8.  L. 

Wr.  0.  C.  Gives    *    *    * 

C.  T.  Who  cometh  ? 

W.  »iA  S.  L.,  whom  our  worthy  brother  L. 
V.  commanded  us  to  deliver  to  the  C.  T. 

C.  T.  He  should  have  received  his  first 
lesson  in  the  V.  I  would  be  assured  of  his 
proficiency. 

Let  the  S.  L.  advance  the  signs  in  which 
he  is  instructed. 

C.  T.  'Tis  well.  I  will  conduct  thee  to 
the  A.  B. 

A.  B. 

A.  B.  Who  cometh  ? 

C.  T.  A  S.  L.,  whom  our  trusty  brother 
W.  has  brought  hither  by  command  of  the 
L.  V.  I  have  proved  him,  and  found  him 
duly  proficient  in  the  lesson  he  has  re 
ceived:  he  would  journey  East  for  instruc 
tion. 


304 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


A.  B.  His  desire  shall  be  gratified ;  but  it 
is  my  duty,  first,  to  submit  to  him  the  lesson 
of  the  T.*  and  then  to  demand  of  him  a 
solemn  obligation ;  giving  him  assurance 
that  such  obligation  requires  of  him  noth 
ing  inconsistent  with  his  duty  to  his  God, 
his  family,  or  himself.  S.  L.,  with  this  as 
surance,  art  thou  willing  to  take  such  an 
obligation  ? 

S.  L.  I  am. 

LESSON. 

1st,  A  well  defined  belief  in  a  Creator 
and  Supreme  Ruler  of  the  universe,  imparts 
true  dignity  to  man. 

2d.  The  ideas  and  principles  maintained 
by  our  0.  on  the  subject  of  government,  are 
identical  with  those  taught  and  defended 
by  the  founders  of  American  liberty  in  the 
original  thirteen  States  of  North  America. 

3d.  The  liberties  of  those  States  were 
assailed  by  despotic  power,  which  aimed  at 
their  conquest  and  subjugation ;  hence  they 
made  common  cause  for  their  mutual  de 
fense,  and  established  friendly  relations 
with  each  other,  in  the  compact  entitled 
"Articles  of  Confederation  and  Perpetual 
Union  between  the  States." 

4th.  When  those  States  had  maintained 
their  freedom  and  independence,  they  sev 
erally  entered  into  a  compact  entitled  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States  of  Amer 
ica,  for  the  ends  and  purposes  therein  dis 
tinctly  declared  and  specified ;  and  the 
government  thereby  created  was  intrusted 
by  the  States,  acting  in  their  several  capaci 
ties  of  Free  and  Independent  States,  with 
powers  sufficient  to  the  accomplishment  of 
those  ends  and  purposes,  and  no  other; 
powers  not  delegated  to  that  government 
being,  by  the  express  letter  of  the  compact, 
"  reserved  to  the  States  or  to  the  people 
respectively." 

5th.  Sovereignty  resides  in  and  with  the 
people  of  the  States  respectively,  which  are 
parties  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States.  It  can  not  be  alienated,  neither 
can  it  be  delegated.  Some  of  its  powers 
may  be  exercised  by  delegated  authority, 
while  others  can  not  be  so  exercised,  except 
at  the  sacrifice,  on  the  part  of  the  constitu 
ent,  of  all  that  lends  dignity  to  man's  rela 
tion  to  government. 

6th.  The  Government  designated  the 
United  States  of  America  has  no  sover 
eignty,  because  that  is  an  attribute  belong 
ing  to  the  people  in  their  respective  State 
organization,  and  with  which  they  have  not 
endowed  that  government  as  their  common 
agent.  It  was  by  the  terms  of  this  com 
pact,  constituted  by  the  States,  through  the 
express  will  of  the  people  thereof  severally, 
such  common  agent  to  use  and  exercise 
certain  specified  and  limited  powers.  It 
was  authorized  so  far  as  regards  its  status 
and  relations,  as  a  common  agent  in  the 
exercise  of  the  powers  carefully  and  jeal 
ously  delegated  to  it,  to  call  itself  "su 


preme,"  but  not  "sovereign."  Supremacy, 
is  plainly  intended  by  the  tenor  and  spirit 
of  article  VI  of  the  Constitution,  was  cre 
ated,  defined  and  limited  by  the  sovereign- 
;ies  themselves. 

7th.  In  accordance  with  these  principles, 
the  Federal  Government  can  exercise  only 
delegated  power;  hence,  if  those  who  shall 
tiave  been  chosen  to  administer  that  Gov 
ernment,  shall  assume  to  exercise  power 
not  delegated,  they  should  be  regarded  and 
dealt  with  as  usurpers. 

8th.  The  claim  of  "inherent  power,"  or 
'war  power."  as  also  "State  necessity/'  or 
'military  necessity,"  on  part  of  the  func 
tionaries  of  a  constitutional  government,  for 
sanction  of  any  arbitrary  exercise  of  power, 
we  utterly  reject  and  repudiate. 

9th.  All  power  resides  in  the  people,  and 
is  delegated  always  to  be  exercised  for  the 
advancement  of  the  common  weal. 

10th.  Whenever  the  officials,  to  whom  the 
people  have  intrusted  the  powers  of  the 
government,  shall  refuse  to  administer  it  in 
strict  accordance  with  its  constitution,  and 
shall  assume  and  exercise  power  or  author 
ity  not  delegated,  it  is  the  inherent  right, 
and  imperative  duty  of  the  people,  to  resist 
such  officials,  and,  if  need  be,  expel  them 
by  force  of  arms.  Such  resistance  is  not 
revolution,  but  is  solely  the  assertion  of 
right. 

1 1th.  It  is  incompatible  with  the  history 
and  nature  of  our  system  of  government, 
that  federal  authority  should  coerce  by 
arms  a  sovereign  State;  and  all  intimations 
of  such  power  or  right,  were  expressly  with 
held  in  the  Constitution,  which  conferred 
upon  the  Federal  Government  all  its  au 
thority. 

12th.  Upon  the  preservation  of  the  sov 
ereignty  of  the  States,  depends  the  preser 
vation  of  civil  and  personal  liberty. 

13th.  In  a  convention  of  delegates, 
elected  by  the  people  of  a  State,  is  recog 
nized  the  impersonation  of  the  sovereignty 
of  that  State.  The  declaration  of  such  con 
vention  upon  the  subject  matter  for  which 
it  was  assembled,  is  the  ultimate  expression 
of  that  sovereignty.  Such  convention  may 
refer  its  action  back  to  its  constituents,  or 
the  people  may  reverse  the  action  of  one 
convention  by  the  voice  of  another.  Thus 
sovereignty  resides  in  the  people  of  each 
State,  and  speaks  alone  through  their  con 
ventions.  S.  L.,  what  sayest  thou  to  this 
lesson  ?  Do  its  teachings  command  thy 
unqualified  assent  ? 

S.  L.  They  do. 

A.  B.  Present  thyself,  then,  in  the  attitude 
in  which  thou  didst  plight  thy  solemn  vows 
in  the  V.,  holding  in  thy  right  hand  the 
sacred  emblem  of  our  0. 

OBLIGATION. 

-,  in  the  presence  of  God 


I, 

and   these  witnesses,  do  solemnly  declare 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


305 


that  I  do  herein  freely  renew  the  vows 
which  I  plighted  in  the  V.  I  do  further 
promise  that  I  will  never  reveal,  nor  make 
known  any  thing  which  my  eyes  may  be 
hold,  or  any  word  which  my  ears  may  hear 
in  this  T.,  nor  in  any  other  T.,  nor  in  any 
other  place  where  this  fellowship  may  be 
assembled.  That  I  will  never  speak  of,  nor 
intimate,  any  measure  or  measures,  whether 
contemplated  or  determined,  of  this  O.,  to 
any  one  except  to  a  feJlow  of  the  O.  That 
I  will  never  explain  the  use  or  signification 
of  the  emblems  or  insignia  of  the  O.,  to  any 
one  not  a  fellow  thereof,  under  any  pre 
tense  whatsoever,  neither  by  persuasion  nor 
by  coercion;  that  I  will  never  reveal  or 
make  known  any  or  either  of  the  signs, 
hails,  passwords,  watchwords,  nor  initial 
letters  belonging  to  this  0.,  except  to  prove 
or  communicate  with  a  fellow  thereof;  that 
I  will  never  pronounce  the  name  of  this  0. 
in  the  hearing  of  any  man,  woman,  or  child, 
unless  to  a  fellow  thereof;  that  I  will  ever 
have  in  most  holy  keeping  each  and  every 
secret  of  this  O.,  which  may  be  confided  to 
me  by  a  fellow  thereof,  either  within  or 
without  the  T. ;  that  I  will  never  recom 
mend,  for  fellowship  in  this  0.,  any  man 
who  is  not  a  citizen  of  an  American  State, 
except  by  dispensation  to  that  end  by  com 
petent  authority ;  neither  any  person  who 
has  not  attained  the  age  of  eighteen  years, 
neither  any  one  unsound  in  mind,  neither 
any  one  of  African  descent,  whether  slave 
or  free,  neither  a  person  of  bad  repute ;  that 
I  will  ever  cherish  toward  each  and  every 
worthy  fellow  of  this  0.,  fraternal  regard 
and  fellowship ;  that  I  will  ever  aid  a  wor 
thy  fellow  in  distress,  if  in  my  power  so  to 
do;  that  I  will  never  wrong  a  fellow,  nor 
see  him  wronged  if  in  my  power  to  prevent 
it ;  that  I  will  at  all  times  implicitly  obey, 
without  question  or  remonstrance,  all  right 
ful  commands  of  the  constituted  authori 
ties  of  this  O. ;  that  I  will  always  recognize 
and  respond  to  the  hail  of  a  fellow,  when  it 
shall  be  made  in  accordance  with  the  in 
structions  and  injunctions  of  this  0.,  and 
not  otherwise;  and  should  I  cease  to  be  a 
fellow  of  this  0.,  either  of  my  own  volition 
or  by  expulsion,  1  will  hold  and  preserve 
inviolate  my  vows  and  promises  herein  de 
clared,  as  truly  as  while  I  am  in  full  fellow 
ship.  All  this  I  do  solemnly  promise  sa 
credly  to  observe,  perform  and  keep,  under 
such  penalties  as  shall  be  decreed  by  the 
competent  authority  of  this  0.  Amen. 

CHARGE. 

A.  B.  S.  L.,  thy  journey  is  well  nigh  ac 
complished.  .Somewhat  yet  remains,  and 
the  Sons  of  Despotism  will  beset  thy  path 
and  aim  to  turn  thee  back — peradventure 
will  seek  thy  life.  Then  put  thy  trust  in 
God  and  Truth ;  still  thy  journey  leadeth 
due  East  until  thou  art  hailed  by  the  G.  S., 
who  will  further  instruct  thee.  Beware, 
20 


lest  thou  bear  thee  toward  the  North  too 
far  and  lose  thy  way;  as  well,  also,  take 
heed  lest  the  South  entice  thee  too  far 
thither.  We  have  a  trusty  F.  G.,  on  either 
side  thy  way,  who,  true  and  constant  at  his 
post,  perchance  may  hail  thee.  Receive 
what  he  shall  oifer,  and  give  earnest  heed 
to  all  his  words.  S.  L.,  be  thy  watchword — 
Onward ! 

F.  G.  N. 

F.  G.  N.  Who  cometh  ?    Advance. 

C.  T.  A  S.  L.,  by  command  of  our  A.  B. 
in  the  West,  journeying  East  for  light  and 
instruction. 

F.  G.  N.  Then  has  he  left  the  straight 
path  and  lost  his  way ;  danger  is  in  every 
step  he  advances ;  bid  him  turn  back  ;  he 
has  forgotten  the  instructions  of  our  A.  B. 
Was  he  not  charged  to  follow  the  straight 
and  narrow  path? 

C.  T.  True !  we  entered  upon  the  straight 
path,  but  ere  we  had  proceeded  far  we  were 
bewildered  and  lost  our  way.  Wilt  thou 
direct  us  hence  ? 

F.  G.  N.  I  will ;  but  first  I  must  prove 
him,  that  I  may  know  by  what  right  he 
claims  my  care  and  assistance. 

0.  T.  Lo  !  he  hath  a  sign.     (Gives  it.) 

F.  G.  N.  'Tis  well.  Hath  he  a  pass 
word? 

C.  T.  He  has,  and  will  give  it.    (Gives  it.) 

F.  G.  N.  'Tis  well.     Thy  watchword  ? 

S.  L.  Onward. 

F.  G.  N.  'Tis  well!  Now  depart  due 
South.  Shouldst  thou  reach  the  post  of 
our  G.  in  the  South,  he  will  further  instruct 
thee.  Thy  watchword  still — Onward  I 

F.  G.  s. 

F.  G.  S.  Who  cometh?  Strangers,  ad 
vance.  Declare  thy  way  and  purpose. 

C  T.  I  come  with  this  S.  L.  from  our 
worthy  A.  B.  in  the  West,  who  commanded 
us  to  journey  due  East  to  the  G.  S.,  for 
light  and  instruction,  charging  us  to  follow 
the  straight  path;  we  had  not  journeyed 
far  when  we  lost  our  way ;  but  the  worthy 
F.  G.  N.  did  hail  us  as  we  passed  his  post, 
and  turned  our  faces  hitherward.  Wilt 
thou  show  us  our  path  ? 

F.  G.  S.  I  will.  But  first  I  would  prove 
this  friend ;  I  know  thee  well  for  a  true 
man.  Let  the  S.  L.  advance  the  sign. 
(Gives  it.) 

F.  G.  S.  'Tis  well.     Hath  he  a  password  ? 

C.  T.  He  has. 

F.  G.  S.  Bid  him  give  it  me.  (Gives  it.) 
'Tis  well.  Thy  watchword? 

S.  L.  Onward. 

F.  G.  S.  'Tis   well.     Conduct  him  again 
to   the  straight  and  narrow  path;  thence 
onward   due  East  to  our  G.  S.     Let  thy 
watchword  be  ever  and  ever — Onward ! 

G.  s. 

G.  S.  Who  cometh  ?    Advance. 


306 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


C.  T.  G.  S.,  I  have  brought  a  S.  L.  He 
is  from  the  West,  and  hath  journeyed  East 
for  instruction.  He  is  a  citizen;  but  he 
serveth. 

G.  S.  Serveth  !  Whom— what  ? 

C.  T.  God  and  his  country. 

G.  S.  '  Tis  well.  Such  service  fitly  be- 
cometh  the  good  citizen.  By  the  authority 
vested  in  me,  I  give  him  welcome  into  our 
T.,  and  pronounce  him  a  worthy  F.  0.  S.  L. 

(Instruct,  &c.) 

INVOCATION. 

0  God!  Creator  of  all  men,  we  invoke 
Thy  presence.  Help  us  as  Thou  didst  help 
our  fathers.  Before  Thee  we  are  offenders; 
but  spare  us.  We  pursue  Justice — Thou  art 
the  author  of  Justice.  We  seek  Liberty — 
Thou  art  the  giver  of  Liberty.  We  desire 
Peace — Thou  art  the  God  of  Peace.  Purify 
our  intentions;  guide  our  counsels,  and 
give  success  to  our  efforts.  Amen. 

CLOSING. 

0  God!  from  Thee  all  wise  counsels  and 
all  good  works  do  proceed.  Further  Thou 
our  counsels,  prosper  our  works,  and  grant 
us  Thy  peace.  Amen. 

ORDER    OF    BUSINESS. 

1.  Ceremonies  of  Opening. 

2.  Reading  and  approval  of  minutes  of 
preceding  meeting,  and  reports  of  Secretary 
and  Treasurer. 

3.  Balloting  for  Candidates  recommended 
at  a  former  meeting. 

4.  Induction,  of  Candidates. 

5.  Reading  and  consideration  of  commu 
nications  from  other  organizations. 

6.  Nomination  of  Candidates  and  refer 
ence  to  Committee. 

7.  Propositions  for  the  good  of  the  0.,  in 
cluding  immediate  purposes  and  plans,  and 
their  consideration  and  discussion. 

8.  Lecture. 

9.  Information  concerning  the  condition 
of  Members,  whether  any  one  is  sick  or  in 
distress,  requiring  aid  and  assistance. 

INSTALLATION. 

The  officers  elect,  being  up  standing,  the 
Com.  T.  shall  propound  to  each  the  follow 
ing  questions: 

Com.  T. having  been  duly  elected 

to  the  office  of .  do  you  accept  the 

position  to  which  you  have  been  assigned  ? 

Ans.  I  do. 

Com.  Brothers,  are  you  content  with  the 
choice  you  have  made  of ? 

Ans.  We  are. 

The  Com.  will  then  administer  the  fol 
lowing  oath  of  office  to  each,  beginning  at 
the  highest,  and  declare  them  duly  quali 
fied  to  enter  upon  their  respective  duties: 


swear,  in  the  pretence  of  these  witnesses, 
to  support  the  constitution  and  laws  of  the 
O.  S.  L.,  to  obey  all  rightful  orders  of  my 
immediate  G.  Com.  and  the  S.  Com.,  and 

perform  the  duties  of to  the  best  of 

my  ability,  so  help  me  God.     Amen. 


OBLIGATION. 


of 


I, 


— ,  having  been  elected  to  the  office 
-,  for  the  ensuing  term,  do  solemnly 


K.  o.  s.  L. 

K.  C.  W.  Who  cometh? 

K.  C.  A  worthy  Fellow  of  the  0.  S.  L., 
who,  having  been  duly  elected,  desires  in 
duction  into  the  I.  T.  of  our  0. 

K.  C.  W.  It  is  well.  His  desire  shall  be 
gratified ;  but  it  is  my  duty  first  to  submit 
to  him  the  lesson  of  I.  T.,  and  then  to  de 
mand  of  him  a  solemn  obligation,  giving 
him  assurance  that  such  obligation  requires 
of  him  nothing  inconsistent  with  his  duty 
to  God,  to  his  country,  to  his  family,  or  to 
himself.  F.  S.  L.,  with  this  assurance,  art 
thou  content  ? 

Ans.  I  am. 

LESSON    OF    THE    I.    T. 

The  Kentucky  and  Virginia  Resolutions  of  1798, 
Drafted  by  Jefferson  and  Madison. 

1.  The  several  States  composing  the  Uni 
ted  States  of  America,  are  not  united   on 
the   principle   of   unlimited  submission  to 
the  General  Government,  but  by  a  compact 
under  the  style  and  title  of  a  Constitution 
for  the  United  States,  and  of  amendments 
thereto,  they  constituted  a  General  Govern 
ment  for  special  purposes,  delegated  to  that 
Government  certain   definitive   powers,  re 
serving  each  State  to  itself  the  residuary 
mass   of    right    to   their   own    self-govern 
ment  ;  and  whensoever  the  General  Govern 
ment  assumes 

are  un  authoritative, 
this  compact  each  State  acceded  as  a  State, 
and  is  an  integral  party ;  that  this  Govern 
ment,  created  by  this  compact,  was  not 
made  the  exclusive  or  final  judge  of  the 
extent  of  the  powers  delegated  to  itself; 
since  that  would  have  made  its  discretion, 
and  not  the  Constitution,  the  measure  of  its 
powers ;  but  that,  as  in  all  other  cases  of 
compact,  among  powers  having  no  common 
judge,  each  party  has  an  equal  right  to 
judge  for  itself  as  well  of  infractions  as  of 
the  mode  and  measures  of  redress. 

2.  It  is  true  as  a  general  principle,  and  is 
also    expressly   declared,    by    one    of   the 
amendments  to  the  Constitution,  that  the 
"  powers    not     delegated    to    the    United 
States  by  the  Constitution,  nor  prohibited 
to   it   by   the  States,    are   reserved  to   the 
States  respectively,  or  to  the  people;"  and 
no   power   over   the    freedom   of   religion, 
freedom  of  speech,  or  freedom  of  the  press, 
being  delegated   to  .the  United   States   by 
the   Constitution,  nor  prohibited  by  it  to 


undelegated  powers,  its  acts 
itive,  void,  and  of  no  force ;  to 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


307 


the  States,  all  lawful  powers  respecting  the 
same,  did  of  right  remain,  and  were  re 
served  to  the  States  or  the  people ;  and  thus 
was  manifested  their  determination  to  re 
tain  to  themselves  the  right  of  judging 
how  far  the  licentiousness  of  speech,  and 
of  the  press,  may  be  abridged,  without 
lessening  their  useful  freedom  ;  and  how 
far  those  abuses,  which  can  not  be  separa 
ted  from  their  use,  should  be  tolerated, 
rather  than  the  use  be  destroyed,  and  thus 
also  they  guarded  against  all  abridgment, 
by  the  United  States,  of  the  freedom  of 
religious  opinions  and  exercises,  and  re 
tained  to  themselves  the  right  of  protect 
ing  the  same  from  all  human  restraint  or 
interference ;  and  in  addition  to  this  general 
principle  and  express  declaration,  another 
and  more  special  provision  has  been  made 
by  one  of  the  amendments  to  the  Constitu 
tion,  which  expressly  declares,  that  "Con 
gress  shall  make  no  law  respecting  an  es 
tablishment  of  religion,  or  prohibiting  the 
free  exercise  thereof,  or  abridging  the  free 
dom  of  speech,  or  the  press,"  thereby 
guarding  in  the  same  sentence,  and  under 
the  same  words,  the  freedom  of  religion, 
of  speech,  and  of  the  press,  insomuch,  that 
whatever  violated  either,  throws  down  the 
sanctuary  which  covers  the  others,  and, 
therefore,  libels,  falsehood,  and  defamation, 
equally  with  heresy  and  false  religion,  are 
withheld  from  the  cognizance  of  Federal 
tribunals. 

3.  This  0.  does  explicitly  and  perempto 
rily  declare  that  it  views  the  power  of  the 
Federal  Government,  as  resulting  from  the 
compact  to  which  the  States  are  parties: 
us  limited  by  the  plain  sense  and  intention 
of  the  instrument  constituting  that  com 
pact;  as  no  further  valid  than  they  are 
authorized  by  the  grants  enumerated  in 
that  compact ;  and  that  in  the  case  of  a  delib 
erate,  palpable  and  dangerous  exercise  of 
other  powers  not  granted  by  the  said  com 
pact,  the  States,  who  are  parties  thereto, 
have  the  right,  and  are  in  duty  bound,  to 
interpose,  for  arresting  the  progress  of  the 
evil,  and  for  maintaining,  within  their  re 
spective  limits,  the  authorities,  rights  and 
liberties  appertaining  to  them. 

K.  C.  W.  F.  S.  L.,  what  sayest  thou  to 
this  lesson  ?  Do  its  teachings  command 
thy  unqualified  assent  ? 

F.  S.  L.  They  do. 

K.  C.  W.  Present  thyself,  then,  in  the  atti 
tude  in  which  thou  didst  plight  thy  solemn 
vows  in  the  T. 


OBLIGATION. 


I, 


-,  within  the  precincts  of 


this  I.  T.,  do  now  freely  renew  the  TOWS 
plighted  in  my  progress  hither;  I  do  also 
solemnly  swear  that  I  will  faithfully  keep 
secret  every  word  that  I  may  hear,  and  will 
never,  by  speech,  sign,1  or  intimation,  reveal 
any  thing  which  I  may  see  within  or  with 


out  this  I.  T.,  pertaining  to  the  same,  unless 
to  a  true  K. ;  that  I  will  never  explain  or 
exhibit  any  of  the  signs,  hails,  passwords, 
watchwords,  emblems,  insignia,  initial  let 
ters,  nor  the  seal  of  the  1.  T.,  except  to 
prove  or  communicate  with  a  true  K.  I  do 
further  swear,  that  I  will,  as  becometh  a 
true  K.,  at  all  times,  and  in  all  places,  to 
the  utmost  of  my  ability,  respect,  perform, 
and  obey,  each  and  every  order,  command, 
or  request,  made  to  or  of  me  by  the  K.  C. 
C.,  or  other  superior  authority,  touching 
any  matter  or  thing  which  relates  or  per 
tains  to  the  purposes  or  plans  of  the  K.  0. 
8.  L. ;  and  I  do  further  swear  that  I  will 
ever  bear  in  mind  the  lesson  of  the  I.  T.,as 
expounded  to  me  in  this  presence,  and  will 
defend  the  principles  therein  laid  down, 
with  my  life,  if  need  be;  that  my  sword 
shall  ever  be  drawn  in  support  of  the  right, 
and  that  I  will  never  take  up  arms  in  any 
cause  as  a  mercenary.  1  do  further  swear, 
that  I  will  ever  cherish  kindly  regard  and 
fellowship  toward  all  true  K.'s  every-where, 
and  will  ever  aid  them  in  the  defense  of 
their  rights;  that  I  will  ever  honor,  cherish, 
and  protect  woman  and  the  orphan,  and 
especially  the  mother,  widow,  sister,  or  or 
phan  of  a  deceased  K.,  and  will  shield  them 
from  wrong,  insult  and  oppression ;  and  ] 
do  also  swear,  that  I  will  never  induct,  nor 
consent  to  the  induction,  of  any  one  into 
the  1.  T.,  who  shall  not  have  been  duly  and 
well  instructed  in  the  T.  D.,  nor  then,  until 
he  shall  have  been  unanimously  approved 
by  a  legal  conclave  of  K.  0.  S.  L.,  nor  in  any 
place  which  has  not  been  appointed  and 
consecrated  to  that  end  by  the  competent 
authority,  nor  in  the  presence  of  a  less 
number  than  thirteen  true  K.'s,  each  and 
all  of  whom  shall  consent  and  approve  to 
such  induction,  nor  until  I  shall  have  been 
duly  authorized  thereto  by  authority  eman 
ating  from  the  G.  C. ;  and,  finally,  I  do 
solemnly  swear,  in  the  presence  of  these 
K.'s,  my  witnesses,  to  all  and  singular  the 
foregoing,  with  full  knowledge,  and  with 
my  full  assent,  that  the  penalty  declared 
against  any  violation  of  any  part  of  this, 
my  oath,  shall  be  such  as  may  be  declared 
by  the  G.  C.,  and  approved  by  the  S.  C.  of 
the  O.  S.  L.  Divine  presence  1  approve  my 
truth,  and  you,  ye  K.'s,  hear  and  bear  wit 
ness.  Amen! 

K.  C.  W.  It  is  well.  The  K.  C.  will  now 
conduct  thee  to  the  K.  C.  C. 

K.    C.    C. 

K.  C.  C.  Who  cometh  ?    Advance. 

K.  C.  A  worthy  fellow  of  the  0.  S.  L., 
who,  having  taken  the  obligation  required 
in  this  I.  T.,  is,  by  Command  of  the  K.  C. 
W.,  brought  before  thee  for  full  induction. 

K.  C.  C.  It  is  well.  Let  him  kneel  in 
token  of  service  to  God  and  his  country.  * 
Kise, ,  K  0.  S.  L.,  and  re 
ceive  thy  charge. 


308 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


CHARGE. 

Brother !  Thy  presumed  worthiness  hath 
secured  thy  induction  into  the  I.  T.  of  O. 
Let  thy  deeds  approve  thee  worthy.  Obe 
dience,  faith,  truth,  courage,  sincerity,  self- 
denial — these  are  the  virtues  of  the  true 
K.  Make  good  thy  vows.  Honor  thy  God. 


GENERAL  LAWS  OF  THE  S,  L, 

COUNTY  PAEENT  TEMPLES. 

ARTICLE    I. 

SECTION  1.  A  Parent  County  T.    may   be 
instituted  by  an  eligible  brother  who  shall 


then  onward!  still  be  thy  watchword.  On 
ward  ! 

K.  L.  [Here  reads  Isaiah,  chap.  LIX, 
verses  14  to  19,  inclusive.] 

K.  C.  C.   [Instructs.] 


dollarg  pep   dy  to  the 
who   sha11  be  designated  to   institute   the 


II. 

M.    E.    K.    O.    S.    L. 

M.  E.  K.  C.  W.  Who  cometh  ?    Advance. 

K.  C.  A  true  K.,  who,  having  been  duly 
elected  thereto,  desires  induction  in  the  I — t 
T.  of  our  most  excellent  O. 

M.  E.  K.  C.  W. '  It  is  well.  Let  him  pre 
sent  himself  in  our  chosen  attitude  of  invo 
cation. 

OBLIGATION. 


1. 


-,  in   the  presence  of  God 


and  these  M.  E.  K.'s,  do  solemnly  swear, 
that  I  will  never  reveal,  or  make  known, 
directly  or  indirectly,  any  thing  whatever, 
pertaining  to  the  M.*  E.  K.  0.  S.  L. ;  neither 
will  I  indicate,  by  word  or  intimation,  any 
thing  of,  or  concerning  the  same,  except  to 
a  brother  thereof,  whom  I  shall  have  first 
duly  proved.  I  do  further  swear,  that  1 
will,  at  all  times,  and  in  all  places,  yield 
prompt  and  implicit  obedience,  to  the  ut 
most  of  my  ability,  without  remonstrance, 
hesitation.*)!'  delay,  to  any  and  every  man 
date,  order  or  request,  of  my  immediate  M. 
E.  G.  C.,  in  all  things  touching  the  purposes 
of  the  0.  S.  L.,  and  to  defend  the  principles 
thereof,  when  assailed  in  my  own  State  or 
country,  in  whatsoever  capacity  may  be  as 
signed  to  me  by  authority  of  our  0. ;  and  I 
do  further  swear,  that  I  will  never  induct, 
or  consent  to  the  induction,  of  any  person 
into  the  I — t  T.,  until  he  shall  have  first  been 
approved  by  at  least  thirteen  M.  E.  K.'s  of 
the  local  C.  to  which  he  is  proposed  for  in 
duction,  except  by  express  dispensation  to 
that  end  from  superior  authority ;  and  that 
I  will  ever  faithfully  keep  secret  every 
counsel  of  M.  E.  K.'s,  whether  in  or  out  of 
C.  To  all  and  singular  the  foregoing,  I  do 
solemnly  swear,  with  full  knowledge,  and 
my  assent,  that  the  penalty  for  any  viola 
tion  of  any  part  thereof,  shall  be  whatso 
ever  may  be  decreed  by  the  G.  C.  S.,  and 
approved  by  the  S.  C. — 0.  S.  L.;  so  help  mo, 
God!  Amen! 
K.  C.  C.  [Instruct*] 


SEC.  2.  Branch  County  T.'s  may  be  insti 
tuted  by  the  mode  above,  or  by  the  officers 
of  the  Parent  T.  Provided,  That  the  Grand 
Sig.  of  any  Parent  T.,  of  this  State,  be  au 
thorized  to  organize  subordinate  temples 
in  any  township  where  none  have  been  or 
ganized,  subject  to  the  constitution  and  rules 
of  this  order,  and  that  until  a  Parent  T. 
be  organized  in  such  county,  to  which  said 
township  belongs,  the  secretary  thereof 
shall  report  to  the  G.  Sec.  of  this  State. 

SEC.  3.  The  names  and  location  of  Parent 
and  Branches,  shall  not  be  changed  with 
out  permission  of  the  G.  Council,  or  without 
written  consent  of  the  G.  Sec. 

ARTICLE    II. 

SECTION  1.  Every  T.  in  the  State  of  Indi 
ana  shall  meet  twice  in  every  month,  and 
oftener  if  they  shall  deem  proper,  and  shall 
be  opened  as  near  as  may  be  at  the  time 
prescribed  by  the  Rules  of  Order. 

SEC.  2.  Special  meetings  may  be  held, 
upon  the  call  of  G.  S.,  or  when  requested 
to  do  so  by  five  members  of  the  T.,  general 
notice  of  such  meeting  to  be  given  as  far 
as  possible. 

SEC.  3.  At  any  regular  or  special  meeting, 
at  which  the  first  and  second  officers  shall 
be  absent,  a  qualified  degree  member  may 
be  chosen  to  preside. 

SEC.  4.  EachT.  is  empowered  to  designate 
what  number,  not  less  than  five,  shall  con 
stitute  a  quorum  for  the  transaction  of  bu 
siness. 

ARTICLE    III. 

SECTION  1.  The  elective  officers  of  the  Pa 
rent  T.'s  shall  be— M.  E.  K.  G;  M.  E  K.  C 
W.;  M.  E.  K.  Sec.;  M.  E.  K.  Treas.;  M.  E.  K. 
Lecturer  of  the  V.;  and  M.  E.  K.  Rep.  to 
G.  C.  The  officers  shall  be  appointed  M. 
E.  K.  Cond.;  M.  E.  K.  Marshal;  M.  E.  K. 
W.,  T.;  M.  E.  K.  W.,  0.  C. 

SEC.  2.  The  elective  and  appointed  officers 
of  a  Branch  County  T.,  shall  be  those  de 
signated  in  the  ritual  of  the  order. 

Sic.  3.  The  election  of  all  officers  shall 
take  place  annually,  on  or  not  to  exceed 
two  weeks  previous  to  the  22d  day  of  Feb 
ruary  in  each  year. 

SEC.  4.  At  the  same  time  and  place  the 
Parent  T.  shall  elect  two  Representatives 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


309 


to  the  G.  Council,  and  one  additional  Repre 
sentative  for  every  one  thousand  members 
in  said  county. 

SEC.  5.  All  elections  shall  be  by  ballot, 
and  a  majority  of  all  the  votes  given  be  ne 
cessary  to  a  choice.  Provided,  That  when 
ever  there  shall  be  but  one  candidate,  the 
election  may  be  by  viva  voce. 

SEC.  6.  Any  elected  or  appointed  officer 
who  shall  absent  himself  from  the  Temple 
for  three  successive  stated  meetings,  unless 
such  absence  be  satisfactorily  accounted 
for,  shall  thereby  vacate  his  ofKce,  and  the 
vacancy  shall  be  filled  by  special  election, 
and  the  member  so  elected  or  appointed  to 
fill  such  vacancy  shall,  if  he  serve  under 
such  election  or  appointment,  receive  all 
the  honors  of  the  station  as  though  he  had 
served  the  full  term. 

SKC.  7  All  elective  officers  shall  continue 
to  serve  until  their  respective  successors  are 
duly  elected  and  qualified. 

ARTICLE    IV. 

SECTION  1.  The  duties  of  the  G.  S.  and 
M.  E.  K.  C.  shall  be— 

1st.  To  preside  at  all  meetings  of  the 
Temple  at  which  they  may  be  present,  and 
open  and  close  the  same  in  due  form ;  to 
preserve  strict  order  and  decorum,  and  en 
force  the  Constitution  and  Laws  of  the 
Order. 

2d.  To  decide  all  questions  of  order,  sub 
ject  to  appeal,  by  two  members,  from  his 
decision  to  the  Temple. 

3d.  To  give  the  casting  vote  on  all  ques 
tions  before  the  Temple,  in  which  there 
may  be  an  equal  division  of  members,  ex 
cept  in  the  election  of  officers  and  appeals 
from  his  decision. 

4th.  To  inspect  all  ballots  on  application 
for  membership,  degrees,  or  certificates, 
and  report  thereon  to  the  Temple. 

5th.  To  sign  all  orders  drawn  on  the 
Treasurer,  for  the  payment  of  such  sums  of 
money  as  may,  from  time  to  time,  be  voted  by 
the  Temple,  and  also  such  documents  as  may 
require  his  signature  to  authenticate  them. 

6th.  To  appoint  the  officers  herein  be 
fore  specified,  at  the  time  of  his  installa 
tion,  and  to  fill  vacancies  in  the  same 
whenever  they  may  occur. 

7th.  To  appoint,  at  the  same  time,  such 
standing  committees  as  the  Temple  may 
prescribe,  and  such  other  committees,  from 
time  to  time,  as  may  be  required  by  the 
Constitution  and  Laws,  or  directed  by  the 
Temple. 

8th.  To  see  that  a  brother  is  visit-ed  im 
mediately  upon  being  advised  of  his  illness 
or  distress,  and  to  continue  to  do  so  at  least 
once  per  week,  during  such  illness  or  dis 
tress,  and  see  that  he  is  duly  provided  with 
attendants. 

9th.  To  install  their  successors  in  office. 

SEC.  2.  Duties  of  the  M.  E.  K.  Sec. 

1st.  To  keep,  in  suitable  books  for  that  j 


purpose,  the  accounts  of  the  Temple,  and 
the  members  thereof. 

2d.  To  receive  all  moneys  due  the  Temple, 
pay  the  same  to  the  Treasurer,  and  take  his 
receipt  therefor. 

3d.  To  make  out  all  notices  that  may  be 
required  for  special  meetings,  attendance 
upon  the  sick,  or  distressed. 

4th.  To  furnish  the  Temple,  on  the  night 
preceding  the  expiration  of  each  term  of 
three  months,  a  list  of  the  members  thereof, 
who  are  delinquent,  with  the  amount  due 
by  each. 

5th.  To  make  out,  at  the  expiration  of 
each  term  of  three  months,  a  report  to  the 
Gran,fi  Council,  in  such  form  as  said  Grand 
Council  shall  direct,  which  he  shall  read  in 
open  Temple,  and  record  in  a  book  to  be 
kept  for  that  purpose ;  and  when  duly  ap 
proved  by  the  Temple  and  signed  by  the 
proper  officers,  he  shall  forward  the  same 
to  the  Grand  Secretary,  which  shall  be  done 
within  ten  days  from  the  expiration  of  each 
term  of  three  months. 

6th.  To  enroll  in  a  book,  provided  for  that 
purpose,  the  names  of  the  members  of  the 
Temple,  age,  occupation,  and  residence 
thereof,  and  the  degrees  taken  by  each; 
noting  from  time  to  time,  in  a  proper  mar 
ginal  column,  the  fact  of  death,  suspension, 
expulsion,  or  withdrawal,  as  the  same  may 
occur. 

7th.  To  attend  the  committees  appointed 
to  audit  the  books  and  accounts  of  the  Tem 
ple,  and  render  such  assistance  as  may  be 
necessary. 

8th.  To  deliver  up  to  his  successor  in 
office,  all  books  and  papers  appertaining  to 
his  office,  which  may  be  in  his  possession. 

9th.  Generally  to  do  and  perform  such 
other  acts  as  may  be  required  of  him  by 
the  Temple,  and  by  the  laws  and  usages  of 
the  order. 

He  shall  receive  for  his  services  such  com 
pensation  as  the  Temple  may  determine. 

10th.  To  keep  accurate  minutes  of  the 
Temple  in  a  book  for  that  purpose. 

ARTICLE  v. 

SECTION  1.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the 
Treasurer — 

1st.  To  receive  from  the  Secretary  all 
moneys  due  the  T. 

2d.  To  pay  all  orders  drawn  upon  the 
funds  in  his  hands,  when  properly  at 
tested. 

3d.  To  have  his  books  and  accounts  ready 
for  settlement  at  the  expiration  of  his  term 
of  office,  and  open  for  inspection  by  the 
officer  of  the  T.,  or  a  committee  appointed 
for  that  purpose,  at  all  times. 

4th.  To  deliver  to  his  successor  in  office, 
at  the  expiration  of  his  term  of  office,  re 
signation  thereof,  or  removal  therefrom,  all 
moneys  remaining  in  his  hands,  and  all 
books  and  papers  pertaining  to  his  office. 

To  give  bond  with  two  sureties,  condi- 


810 


TREASON    TRIALS    AT    INDIANAPOLIS. 


tioned  upon  the  faithful  discharge  of  his 
duties,  as  the  T.  may  require. 

SEC.  2.  The  terms  of  three  months  shall 
commence  February  22d  of  each  year. 

ARTICLE    VI. MEMBERSHIP. 

SECTION'  1.  S.  L .  Any  white  male 

person,  of  good  moral  character,  above  the 
age  of  eighteen  years,  being  proposed  by 
one,  and  vouched  for  by  two  members  in 

good  standing,  may  receive  the  S.  L 

lesson  of  this  order. 

SEC.  2.  When  the  name  of  a  candidate  is 
proposed  for  membership,  it  shall  be  refer 
red  to  a  committee  of  three,  appointed  by 
the  G.  S.;  said  committee  to  report  on  such 
proposition  at  the  next  regular  meeting  of 
the  Temple,  and  no  balloting  for  member 
ship  to  take  place  until  the  committee  report 
as  aforesaid. 

SEC.  3.  First  degree  members  must  be  ad 
vanced  in  accordance  with  provisions  laid 
down  in  the  ritual  of  the  second  and  third 
degrees. 

SEC.  4.  All  candidates  for  degrees  must 
be  balloted  for.  One  negative  vote  lays  the 
application  over  one  week ;  two  negative 
votes,  for  three  months;  three  negative 
votes  disposes  of  it  finally,  unless  recon 
sidered. 

SEC.  5.  A  member  changing  his  residence, 
wishing  to  withdraw  from  one  T.  and  unite 
with  another,  shall  be  entitled  to  receive  a 
certificate  of  membership,  which,  being 
filed  with  his  application,  if  found  worthy, 
shall  be  transferred,  by  vote  of  the  T.,  at 
his  new  residence. 

SEC.  6.  No  T.  is  permitted  to  receive  ap 
plications  from  persons  not  residents  of  the 
county  in  which  the  T.  is  located,  and  all 
applications  must  be  made  to  the  T.  nearest 
to  the  applicant's  residence. — JRes.  of  G.  C. 

SEC.  7.  An  expelled  member  can  only  be 
reinstated  by  the  consent  of  the  Temple 
from  which  he  was  expelled. 

SEC.  8.  If  a  person  is  proposed  for  mem 
bership  and  elected,  and  previous  to  initia 
tion  the  Temple  obtains  information  of  bad 
conduct,  it  may  refuse  to  initiate. 

ARTICLE    VII. FEES   AND    DUES. 

SECTION  1.  The  fee  for  the  first  or  branch 
T.  degree,  shall  be  one  dollar;  the  fee  for 
the  second  shall,  be  one  dollar  and  fifty 
cents;  and  the  fee  for  the  third  shall  be 
two  dollars  and  fifty  cents. 

SEC.  2.  The  monthly  flues  for  each  and 
every  member,  shall  not  be  less  than  ten 
nor  more  than  fifty  cents. 

LAWS    OF    GENERAL    APPLICATION. 

1st.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  every  member 
of  this  order,  when  possessed  of  any  infor 
mation  touching  the  improper  demeanor  of 
a  brother,  to  file  written  complaint  with  his 
immediate  G.  S.  or  C.,  and  shall  make  it 
known  to  no  other  person,  and  it  shall  be 
the  duty  of  such  officer  specifying  the 


charge  in  regular  meeting  of  T.,  withhold 
ing  name  of  the  informant,  appoint  corn- 
mittee  of  five  to  examine  and  report  upon 
such  charge,  and,  if  upon  report  of  com 
mittee,  such  charge  shall  be  sustained  by 
said  T.,  then  said  accused  shall  be  notified 
to  appear,  and  shall  be  regularly  tried  by 
the  T.,  said  committee  conducting  the  pro 
secution,  and  accused  shall  have  counsel  in 
his  behalf,  witnesses  may  be  examined,  and 
testimony  of  those  not  members  of  the 
order  may  be  taken,  but  not  ex  parte. 

Upon  fair  hearing  the  T.  shall  decide 
upon  his  guilt  and  punishment,  which  slial). 
|  not  be  higher  than  expulsion  from  the 
order.  The  various  grades  of  punishment 
shall  be  reprimand,  suspension  for  a  time, 
and  expulsion. 

2d.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  all  T.'s,  in  case 
of  expulsion  of  a  member  or  members,  to 
notify  the  G.  Sec.  by  letter;  and  it  shall  be 
the  duty  of  said  G.  Sec.  to  notify  all  T.'s  in 
this  jurisdiction  of  said  fact, 

Visiting  Brothers. 

3d.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  presiding 
officer  of  each  and  every  T.,  whenever  ne 
cessary,  to  appoint  two  competent  brothers 
an  examining  committee  for  the  evening; 
for  no  visiting  brother  can  be  admitted  to 
the  T.,  unless  he  shall  be  known,  recognized 
by  the  officers,  vouched  for  by  a  brother,  or 
proved  by  the  committee  so  appointed. 

Payment  of  Assessments. 

4th.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  each  and 
every  P.  T.  in  the  State,  to  remit  to  the  G. 
Sec.  such  amounts  as  the  G.  Council  shall 
levy  against  them,  promptly,  vipon  the  ap 
plication  of  the  G.  Sec.,  and  in  case  of  fail 
ure  so  to  do  for  a  period  of  three  months, 
such  P.  T.  shall  forfeit  their  organization. 

We  recommend  the  Constitution  of  the 
Society  of  the  Illini.  for  all  public  clubs; 
and  the  rules  of  order,  adopted  by  the  G. 
Council,  for  the  government  of  all  subor 
dinate  T.'s  in  Indiana. 

5th.  Any  additional  by-laws  may  be  made 
by  each  County  Temple,  not  inconsistent 
with  the  laws  of  the  Grand  Council,  by  a  two- 
thirds  vote  of  the  members  of  such  temple, 
four  weeks  notice  being  given  therefor. 

RULES    OF    ORDER. 

1st.  When  the  presiding  officer  takes  the 
chair,  the  officers  and  members  shall  take 
their  respective  seats;  and  at  the  sound  of 
the  gavel  there  shall  be  a  general  silence, 
under  the  penalty  of  a  public  reprimand. 

2d.  The  business  of  the  annual  meetings 
shall  be  taken  up  in  the  following  order : 

Temple  opened ; 

Officers'  roll  called ; 

Minutes  of  last  stated  and  intervening 
meetings  read  and  passed  upon; 

Certificates  of  members; 

Reports  of  Temples; 

Reports  of  Committees ; 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


311 


Unfinished  business ; 

New  business. 

3d.  The  presiding  officer  shall  preserve 
order  arid  decorum,  and  pronounce  the  de 
cision  of  the  Temple  on  all  subjects;  he 
may  speak  to  points  of  order  in  preference 
to  other  members,  rising  from  his  seat  for 
that  purpose;  he  shall  decide  questions  of 
order  without  debate,  unless  entertaining 
doubts  on  the  point,  subject  to  an  appeal  to 
the  Temple  by  any  two  members,  on  which 
appeal  no  member  shall  speak  more  than 
once. 

4th.  No  member  shall  disturb  another  in 
his  speech,  unless  to  call  him  to  order,  nor 
stand  up  to  interrupt  him,  nor  when  a  mem 
ber  is  speaking,  pass  between  him  and  the 
chair,  or  leave  the  hall. 

5th.  Every  member  when  he  speaks  shall 
rise  and  respectfully  address  the  chair,  and 
when  he  has  finished  shall  sit  down.  Mem 
bers  speaking  shall  confine  themselves  to 
the  question  under  debate,  and  avoid  all 
personality  or  indecorous  language,  as  well 
as  any  reflection  upon  the  Temple  or  its 
members. 

6th.  If  two  or  more  members  rise  to 
speak  at  the  same  time,  the  chair  shall  de 
cide  which  is  entitled  to  the  floor. 

7th.  No  member  shall  speak  until  he  has 
been  recognized  by  the  chair. 

8th.  No  member  shall  speak  more  than 
once  on  the  same  subject  or  question,  until 
all  the  members,  wishing  to  speak,  shall 
have  had  an  opportunity  to  do  so,  nor  more 
than  twice  without  permission  of  the  T. 

9th.  If  a  member,  while  speaking,  be 
called  to  order  by  the  chair,  he  shall  cease 
speaking,  and  take  his  seat  until  the 
question  of  order  is  determined,  and  per 
mission  is  given  him  to  proceed. 

10th.  No  motion  shall  be  sulject  to  de 
bate  until  it  shall  have  been  seconded,  and 
stated  by  the  chair,  and  it  shall  be  reduced 
to  writing  if  desired  by  any  member. 

llth.  When  a  question  is  before  the  T., 
no  motion  shall  be  received  except  for  ad 
journment — the  previous  question — to  lie 
on  the  table — to  postpone  indefinitely — to 
postpone  to  a  certain  time — to  divide — to 
commit  or  amend;  which  motions  shall 
severally  have  preference  in  the  order  here 
in  arranged. 

12th.  On  the  call  of  five  members,  the 
previous  question  shall  be  put.  The  pre 
vious  question  having  been  ordered,  all 
further  amendments  and  debates  shall  be 
precluded,  but  the  amendments  that  have 
been  previously  offered  shall  be  voted  upon 
in  their  order  before  the  main  question. 

13th.  When  a  blank  is  to  be  filled,  and 
different  sums,  numbers,  or  times  shall  be 
proposed,  the  question  shall  first  be  taken 
upon  the  highest  sum  or  number,  and  long 
est  or  latest  time. 

14th.  No  motion  for  reconsideration  shall 
be  received  unless  moved  by  a  member 


who  voted  in  the  majority  in  the  first  in 
stance. 

15th.  Any  member  may  excuse  himself 
from  serving  on  any  committee  at  the  time 
of  his  appointment,  if  he  is  then  a  member 
of  one  other  committee. 

16th.  The  person  first  named  on  a  com 
mittee  shall  act  as  chairman  thereof  until 
another  is  chosen  by  themselves. 

17th.  The  consequences  of  a  measure  may 
be  reprobated  in  strong  terms;  but  to  ar 
raign  the  motives  of  those  who  propose  or 
advocate  it,  is  a  personality  and  against 
order. 

18th.  While  the  chair  is  putting  a  ques 
tion  or  addressing  the  Temple,  or  whilst 
any  other  member  is  speaking,  no  member 
shall  walk  about  or  leave  the  Temple,  or 
entertain  private  discourse. 

19th.  No  motion  can  be  made  by  one 
member  while  another  is  speaking;  and  no 
motion  can  be  made  without  rising  and  ad 
dressing  the  chair. 

20th.  The  chair,  or  any  member,  doubting 
the  decision  of  the  question,  may  call  for  a 
division  of  the  Temple,  and  a  count  of  the 
affirmative  and  negative  vote. 

21st.  All  reports  of  committees  shall  be 
made  in  writing. 

22d.  Any  member  has  a  right  to  protest, 
and  to  have  his  protest  spread  upon  the 
journal. — C.  M. 

23d.  Motions  for  adjournment,  the  pre 
vious  question,  to  lie  on  the  table,  and  to 
postpone  indefinitely,  shall  be  put  without 
debate. 

24th.  Any  of  these  rules  may  be  dis 
pensed  with  by  a  vote  of  two-thirds  of  the 
members  present. 


CONSTITUTION  OF  THE  GRAND  COUN 
CIL  OF  S,  L,  OF  INDIANA, 

ARTICLE   I 

SECTION  1.  This  body  derives  and  exer 
cises  its  power  and  authority  from  and  by 
virtue  of  authority  vested  in  it  by  the  Su 
preme  Grand  Council  of  the  United  States. 

SEC.  2.  The  members  of  this  G.  C.  shall 
consist  of  Representatives  duly  elected  and 
commissioned  by  the  various  County  Tem 
ples.  Each  County  Temple  shall  be  enti 
tled  to  two  Representatives ;  and  for  each 
one  thousand  members  one  additional 
Representative. 

SEC.  3.  The  legislative  functions  of  this 
body  shall  be  vested  in  such  Representa 
tives  duly  chosen  and  commissioned,  and 
the  elective  officers  of  this  G.  C. 

SEC.  4.  All  such  Representatives  and  Mil 
itary  Officers,  so  accredited,  shall  be  enti 
tled  to  receive  the  sign  of  the  G.  C. 

SEC.  5.  Representatives  shall  be  elected 
at  any  regular  meeting,  prior  to  the  22d 


312 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


day  of  February,  in  each  year,  and  hold 
their  office  during  the  term  of  one  year,  or 
during  the  pleasure  of  the  County  T. 

ARTICLE    II. 

SEC.  1.  The  elective  officers  of  this  G.  C. 
shall  consist  of  the  following,  who  shall  be 
elected  at  or  prior  to  the  annual  meeting, 
held  on  the  22d  day  of  February,  in  each 
year,  viz.:  G.  C.;  Dep.  G.  C.;  G.  Sec.;'G.  Treas.; 
G.  C.  to  S.  C.;  one  Maj.  Gen'l  for  each  mili 
tary  district,  prescribed  by  law. 

SEC.  2.  The  appointed  officers  of  this  G. 
body  shall  be,  one  Grand  Marshal,  one 
Grand  Conductor,  one  Grand  Chaplain,  one 
Grand  Warden  of  the  Council,  one  Grand 
W-arden  of  the  0.  C. 

SEC.  3.  The  members  of  the  G.  Com.  staff, 
and  all  military  officers  above  the  rank  of 
Colonel,  shall  be  ex  ojficio  members  of  this 
G.  C.,  and  entitled  to  the  sign  and  to  partici 
pate  in  its  deliberations. 

SEC.  4.  When  upon  a  call  for  a  vote  by 
counties,  all  shall  be  excluded  save  the 
duly  elected  Representatives,  and  in  case 
of  a  tie  vote  the  G.  Com.  presiding  shall 
give  the  casting  vote. 

ARTICLE   III. 

SECTION  I.  This  G.  C.  shall  have  the  sole 
right  to  determine  its  own  membership, 
and  may  exclude  any  one,  representative 
or  otherwise,  who  shall  be  convicted  of  in 
decorous  deportment,  or  any  dishonorable 
act.  Provided,  That  no  punishment  higher 
than  reprimand  shall  be  inflicted,  expul 
sion  from  this  Order  being  reserved  to  the 
County  Temples. 

SEC.  2.  There  shall  be  chosen,  annually, 
the  Grand  Commander,  and  two  additional 
members  of  this  body,  delegates  to  the  S. 
G.  C.,  to  whom  the  G.  Secretary  shall  issue 
certificates  of  election,  with  the  seal  of  the 
Council. — Law  of  8,  G.  C. 

SEC.  3.  The  meetings  of  this  G.  C.,  regu 
lar  and  special,  shall  be  held  at  such  time 
and  place  as  may  be  rixed  by  law. 

SEC.  4.  All  elections  shall  be  by  ballot, 
and  a  majority  of  all  the  votes  given  shall 
be  necessary  to  constitute  a  choice.  When 
there  are  more  than  two  candidates  for 
any  office,  the  lowest  of  such  candidates, 
at  each  ballot,  after  the  first,  shall  be 
dropped,  and  all  votes  that  may  be  given 
for  such  candidate  or  candidates  thereafter, 
shall  not  be  counted.  In  the  event  of  a 
tie  between  two  candidates  for  the  same 
office,  for  two  successive  ballotings,  the 
election  shall  be  decided  by  lot. 

ARTICLE    IV. DUTIES    OF    GRAND    OFFICERS. 

SECTION  1.  The  G.  C.  shall  have  and  exer 
cise  a  general  supervision  of  the  Order  in 
the  State  of  Indiana.  He  shall  preside  at 
all  meetings  of  the  Grand  Council,  at 
which  he  may  be  present,  preserve  order, 
nnd  cause  the  Constitution  and  Laws  to  be 


strictly  observed.  His  decision  on  all 
points  not  provided  for  in  the  Constitution 
or  General  Laws,  shall  be  conclusive,  unless 
reversed  by  the  Grand  Council  of  Indiana, 
or  the  S.  G.  C.  of  the  United  States,  upon 
appeal  thereto.  He  shall  give  the  casting 
vote,  in  case  of  an  equal  division,  upon  all 
questions  arising  in  the  Grand  Council,  t-x- 
cept  on  appeals  from  his  own  decision;  and 
in  all  elections  of  officers,  he  shall  be  enti 
tled  to  vote  only  as  other  members.  He 
shall  not  be  entitled  to  participate  in  any 
discussions  in  the  Grand  Council,  except  in 
committee  of  the  whole,  or  upon  questions 
of  order  and  appeals  from  his  decision.  He 
shall  sign  all  orders  drawn  on  the  Grand 
Treasurer,  and  all  other  documents  which 
may  require  his  signature.  He  shall  fill  all 
official  vacancies  not  otherwise  provided 
for.  He  shall  appoint  all  committees,  ex 
cept  when  the  nomination  and  appoint 
ment  thereof  shall  be  reserved  by  the 
Grand  Council.  He  shall  have  power  and 
authority  to  grant  dispensations  for  confer 
ring  degrees  in  the  institution  of  new  IV m- 
ples,  and  for  the  purpose  of  qualifying 
officers  thereof,  during  the  first  six  months; 
and  for  all  other  matters  unprovided  for, 
wherein  immediate  action  is  necessary. 
He  shall  have  power  to  call  special  meet 
ings  of  the  Grand  Council,  orof  any  subordin 
ate  Temple,  whenever  he  may  deem  it  ne 
cessary  for  the  good  of  the  Order  so  to  do. 
He  shall,  from  time  to  time,  give  informa 
tion,  etc. 

SEC.  2.  The  Pep.  G.  C.  shall  assist  the 
G.  C.,  and  in  his  absence  perform  his  du 
ties. 

SEC.  3.  The  Grand  Secretary  shall  keep  a 
journal  of  the  proceedings  of  this  body, 
and  money  accounts,  shall  receive  all 
moneys  and  pay  the  same  to  the  Treasurer, 
taking  his  receipt  therefor.  He  shall  attest 
all  dispensations  granted,  and  commissions 
issued,  by  the  G.  Commander.  He  shall  trans 
mit  an  annual  report  of  the  state  of  the  order 
in  Indiana,  to  the  S.  G.  C.  of  the  United  States, 
in  such  form  as  the  said  S.  G.  C.  may  direct. 
He  shall  receive  all  documents  for  the  G. 
C.,  and  immediately  submit  the  same  to  the 
G.  Commander.  He  shall,  under  the  super 
vision  of  the  G.  Com.,  conduct  the  corre 
spondence  of  the  G.  C.  He  shall,  when  so 
directed,  summon  the  Representatives  to 
attend  its  special  meetings.  He  shall  pre 
pare  and  procure  the  signatures  of  the  offi 
cers  to  all  charters  that  may  be  granted  by 
the  G.  C.  He  shall,  whenever  notified, 
attend  any  committee  of  the  Grand  Coun 
cil,  and  furnish  such  official  papers  and  doc 
uments  as  may  be  required.  He  shall  have 
the  custody  of  the  Grand  Seal,  and  perform 
such  other  duties  as  may  be  prescribed  in 
this  Constitution,  or  the  Laws  of  the  Grand 
Council.  He  shall  receive  for  his  services, 
annually,  the  sum  of  eight  hundred  dollars; 
and  shall  give  such  bond  and  security  for 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


313 


the  faithful  performance  of  his 
the  Grand  Council  may  require. 


duties,  as       3d.  The  presiding  officer  shall  preserve 
order  and  decorum,  and  pronounce  the  de- 


SEC.  4.  The G.  Treasurer  shall  have  charge  j  cision   of  the   Temple  on  all  subjects;  he 


of  the  funds,  and  all  other  property  or  evi 
dence  of  title  belonging  to,  or  held  in  trust 
by  the  Grand  Council,  which  may  be  placed 


may  speak  to  points  of  order  in  preference 
to  other  members,  rising  from  his  seat  for 
that  purpose;  he  shall  decide  questions  of 


in  his  hands.     He  shall  keep   correct  ac-  order  without  debate,  unless  entertaining 

doubts  on  the  point,  subject  to  an  appeal  to 
the  Temple  by  any  two  members,  on  which 
appeal  no  member  shall  speak  more  than 
once. 

4th.  No  member  shall  disturb  another  in 
his  speech,  unless  to  call  him  to  order,  nor 
stand  up  to  interrupt  him,  nor  when  a  mem 
ber  is  speaking,  pass  between  him  and  the 
chair,  or  leave  the  hall. 

5th.  Every  member  when  he  speaks  shall 
rise  and  respectfully  address  the  chair,  and 
when  he  has  finished  shall  sit  down.  Mem 
bers  speaking  shall  confine  themselves  to 
the  question  under  debate,  and  avoid  all 
personality  or  indecorous  language,  as  well 
as  any  reflection  upon  the  Temple  or  its 


counts  of  all  moneys  which  he  may  receive 
from  the  G.  Secretary,  and  from  all  other 
sources,  and  pay  all  orders  drawn  upon  the 
funds  in  his  hands,  by  the  Grand  Com 
mander,  when  attested  by  the  G.  Secretary. 
He  shall,  whenever  notified,  attend  any 
committee  of  the  Grand  Council,  and 
furnish  such  books  and  papers  in  his  posses 
sion  as  may  be  required.  At  the  expiration 
of  his  term  of  office,  or  after  resignation 
thereof,  or  removal  therefrom,  he  shall 
make  full  settlement  with  the  Finance 
Committee,  and  deliver  to  his  successor  in 
office,  all  moneys,  books,  bonds,  vouchers 
and  documents,  and  property,  belonging  to, 
or  held  in  trust  by  the  Grand" Council,  which 
may  be  in  his  possession.  Before  entering 
upon  his  duties,  he  shall  give  such  bond 
and  security  as  may  be  required  by  the 
Grand  Council. 

SEC.  5.  Other  appointed  officers  shall 
perform  the  ordinary  duties  of  their  offices, 
as  prescribed  by  custom  or  law. 

SEC.  6.  Any  amendment  to  this  Constitu 
tion  may  be  made  at  any  regular  meeting 
of  this  G.  C.,  by  giving  one  day's-  notice,  in 
writing,  and  receiving  a  majority  vote  of  the 
members  present. 

SEC.  7.  All  elective  officers  shall  take  the 
following  prescribed  oath  of  office  before 
entering  upon  their  duties,  viz.: 


Official  Oath. 
having  been  elected  by 


m 


do,  in  the 
and     these    witnesses, 


to  the  office  of 
presence  of  God 
solemnly  swear  to  maintain  the  Constitu 
tion  and  Laws  of  this  Order ;  obey  all  right 
ful  orders  emanating  from  superior  author 
ity,  and  to  perform  the  duties  which  have 

— ,  to  the 


been  devolved  upon  me,  as 

best  of  my  ability,  so  help  me  God. 


RULES    OF    ORDER. 

1st.  When  the  presiding  officer  takes  the 
chair,  the  officers  and  members  shall  take 
their  respective  seats;  and  at  the  sound  of 
the  gavel  there  shall  be  a  general  silence, 
under  the  penalty  of  a  public  reprimand. 

2d.  The  business  of  the  annual  meetings 
shall  be  taken  up  in  the  following  order : 

Temple  opened ; 

Officers'  roll  called ; 

Minutes  of  last  stated  and  intervening 
meetings  read  and  passed  upon; 

Certificates  of  members; 

Reports  of  Temples ; 

Reports  of  Committees ; 

Unfinished  business ; 

New  business. 


members. 
6th.  If 


two  or    more  members   rise  to 


speak  at  the  same  time,  the  chair  shall  de 
cide  which  is  entitled  to  the  floor. 

7th.  No  member  shall  speak  until  he  has 
been  recognized  by  the  chair. 

8th.  No  member  shall  speak  more  than 
once  on  the  same  subject  or  question,  until 
all  the  members,  wishing  to  speak,  shall 
have  had  an  opportunity  to  do  so,  nor  more 
than  twice  without  permission  of  the  T. 

9th.  If  a  member,  while  speaking,  be 
called  to  order  by  the  chair,  he  shall  cease 
speaking,  and  take  his  seat  until  the 
question  of  order  is  determined,  and  per 
mission  is  given  him  to  proceed. 

10th.  No  motion  shall  be  subject  to  de 
bate  until  it  shall  have  been  seconded,  and 
stated  by  the  chair,  and  it  shall  be  reduced 
to  writing  if  desired  by  any  member. 

llth.  When  a  question  is  before  the  T., 
no  motion  shall  be  received  except  for  ad 
journment — the  previous  question — to  lie 
on  the  table — to  postpone  indefinitely — to 
postpone  to  a  certain  time — to  divide — to 
commit  or  amend;  which  motions  shall 
severally  have  preference  in  the  order  here 
in  arranged. 

12th.  On  the  call  of  five  members,  the 
previous  question  shall  be  put.  The  pre 
vious  question  having  been  ordered,  all 
further  amendments  and  debates  shall  be 
precluded,  but  the  amendments  that  have 
been  previously  offered  shall  be  voted  upon 
in  their  order  before  the  main  question. 

13th.  When  a  blank  is  to  be  filled,  and 
different  sums,  numbers,  or  times  shall  be 
proposed,  the  question  shall  first  be  taken 
upon  the  highest  sum  or  number,  and  long 
est  or  latest  time. 

14th.  No  motion  for  reconsideration  shall 
be  received  unless  moved  by  a  member 
who  voted  in  the  majority  in  the  first  in 
stance. 


314 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


15th.  Any  member  may  excuse  himself 
from  serving  on  any  committee  at  the  time 
of  his  appointment,  if  he  is  then  a  member 
of  one  other  committee. 

16th.  The  person  first  named  on  a  com 
mittee  shall  act  as  chairman  thereof  until 
another  is  chosen  by  themselves. 

17th.  The  consequences  of  a  measure  may 
be  reprobated  in  strong  terms;  but  to  ar 
raign  the  motives  of  those  who  propose  or 
advocate  it,  is  a  personality  and  against  order. 

18th.  While  the  chair  is  putting  a  ques 
tion  or  addressing  the  Temple,  or  whilst 
any  other  member  is  speaking,  no  member 
shall  walk  about  or  leave  the  Temple,  or 
entertain  private  discourse. 

19th.  No  motion  can  be  made  by  one 
member  while  another  is  speaking ;  and  no 
motion  can  be  made  without  rising  and  ad 
dressing  the  chair. 

20th.  The  chair,  or  any  member,  doubting 
the  decision  of  the  question,  may  call  for  a 
division  of  the  Temple,  and  a  count  of  the 
affirmative  and  negative  vote. 

21st.  All  reports  of  committees  shall  be 
made  in  writing. 

22d.  Should  any  committee  be  appointed 
at  one  session  of  the  Grand  Council,  to  re 
port  at  the  next  succeeding  session,  it  shall 
be  the  duty  of  such  committee  to  report  in 
writing,  even  though  they  be  not  Represen 
tatives. 

23d.  Any  member  has  a  right  to  protest, 
and  to  have  his  protest  spread  upon  the 
journal. — C.  M. 

24th.  Motions  for  adjournment,  the  pre 
vious  question,  to  lie  on  the  table,  and  to  post 
pone  indefinitely,  shall  be  put  without  de 
bate. 

25th.  Any  of  these  rules  may  be  dis 
pensed  with  by  a  vote  of  two-thirds  of  the 
members  present.  * 


CONSTITUTION  AND  LAWS  OF  THE 
S.  G.  C. 

SECTION  1.  This  organization  shall  be 
known  as  the  S.  L. 

SEC.  2.  Its  object  and  piirposes  are  the 
maintenance  of  constitutional  freedom  and 
State  rights,  as  recognized  and  established 
by  the  founders  of  our  Republic. 

SEC.  3.  The  system  of  government  of  this 
order  shall  be  vested  in  a  Supreme  Council 
of  the  States,  a  Grand  Council  of  each 
State,  and  Parent  and  Branch  Temples  of 
each  county. 

SEC.  4.  The  officers  of  the  Supreme  Coun 
cil  shall  consist  of  a  Supreme  Commander, 
Secretary  of  State  of  the  Order,  Treasurer, 
and  Clerk  of  the  Council,  who  shall  be  an 
nually  elected  by  the  Supreme  Council,  on 
the  twenty-second  day  of  February,  and 
shall  hold  their  offices  until  their  successors 
are  duly  elected  and  qualified. 

SEC.  5.  The  Supreme    Council    shall    be 


composed  of  the  Grand  Commanders  of  the 
several  States  and  two  delegates,  who  shall 
be  annually  elected  by  the  Grand  Councils 
of  the  respective  States.  Each  delegate 
shall  be  entitled  to  one  vote,  and  when  a 
full  delegation  is  not  in  attendance,  those 
present  may  cast  the  entire  vote  of  the 
State,  and  in  all  cases  of  a  tie  the  presiding 
officer  shall  have  the  casting  vote. 

SEC.  6.  The  Supreme  Council  shall  meet  on 
the  twenty-second  day  of  February,  of  each 
year,  at  such  place  as  may  be  designated. 

SEC.  7.  The  Supreme  Commander  or  throe 
Grand  Commanders  of  States,  may  call 
special  sessions  of  the  Supreme  Council,  at 
such  times  and  places  as  he  or  they  may 
deem  expedient. 

SEC.  8.  The  Supreme  Commander  shall 
take  an  oath  to  observe  and  maintain  the 
principles  of  the  order,  before  entering 
upon  the  duties  of  his  office,  said  oath  to 
be  prescribed  by  law.  He  shall  be  the  pre 
siding  officer  to  the  Supreme  Council,  and 
charged  with  the  execution  of  all  laws  en 
acted  by  it.  He  shall  be  coniinander-in- 
chief  of  all  military  forces  be]onging  to  the 
order,  in  the  various  States,  when  called 
into  actual  service.  He  shall  deliver  a 
message  to  each  meeting  of  the  Supreme 
Council,  showing  the  condition  of  the  order, 
and  such  recommendations  as  its  interest 
may  demand. 

SEC.  9.  The  Deputy  Supreme  Commander, 
in  case  of  death,  absence,  or  resignation  of 
the  Supreme  Commander,  shall  exercise  all 
the  powers  and  perform  all  the  duties  per 
taining  to  said  office ;  shall  take  the  same 
oath  of  office,  and  be  chairman  of  the  Com 
mittee  on  Military  Affairs. 

SEC.  10.  The  Secretary  of  State  of  the 
Order  shall  be  the  chairman  of  the  Com 
mittee  on  the  State  of  the  Order;  shall 
conduct  all  official  correspondence  of  the 
Supreme  Council,  and  be  the  medium  of 
communication  between  the  State  and  Su 
preme  Councils ;  he  shall  ascertain  and 
report  at  each  annual  meeting  of  the  Su 
preme  Council,  the  condition  of  the  order 
in  each  State,  and  make  such  recommenda 
tions  as  he  may  deem  proper. 

SEC.  11.  The  Treasurer  shall  be  under 
such  regulations  as  may  be  prescribed  by 
law;  shall  be  the  custodian  of  all  funds 
belonging  to  the  Supreme  Council ;  shall 
pay  all  orders  drawn  upon  him  by  the  Clerk 
and  countersigned  by  the  Supreme  Com 
mander,  or  chairman  of  the  Auditing  Com 
mittee,  and  make,  at  each  meeting,  reports 
showing  the  financial  condition  of  the 
order,  and  such  recommendations  as  he 
may  deem  expedient. 

SEC.  12.  All  elections  shall  be  by  ballot, 
and  a  majority  of  all  the  votes  cast  shall  be 
necessary  to  a  choice ;  Provided,  That  where 
there  is  but  one  candidate,  the  election 
may  be  viva  voce. 

SEC.  13.  That  the  Supreme  Commander 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


315 


administer  the  oath  to  all  officers;  and 
Councilors  take  the  oath  at  the  Clerk's 
desk. 

GENERAL  LAWS. 

SECTION  1.  A  quorum  of  the  Supreme 
Council  shall  consist  of  a  majority  of  the 
States,  in  which  State  Councils  shall  have 
b^en  established. 

SKC.  2.  Delegates  from  Territorial  Councils 
shall  be  entitled  to  a  seat  and  a  right  to 
speak  in  the  Supreme  Council,  but  no  vote. 

SEC.  3.  The  ordinance  or  constitution  of 
the  Suprerdfc  Council  shall  be  read  at  the 
opening  of  each  session,  and  to  all  new  del 
egates. 

SKC.  4.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Clerk 
to  count  and  announce  all  votes  of  the 
Council,  as  well  when  taken  by  count,  as 
by  States  or  ballot. 

CONDITION  OF  THE  ORDER  AND  REVENUES. 

SEC.  5.  The  Secretaries  of  the  various 
State  Councils  are  required  to  report  to  the 
Secretary  of  the  Supreme  pouncil,  during 
the  month  of  January  of  each  year,  for  his 
report  at  the  annual  sessions,  the  number 
of  brothers  in  the  order,  in  their  respective 
States,  and  also  the  condition  of  their  treas 
uries. 

SKC.  6.  The  Treasurer  of  each  State  Coun 
cil  shall  pay  over  to  the  Treasurer  of  the 
Supreme  Council,  in  January  of  each  year, 
such  sums  as  may  be  assessed  upon  them 
by  the  Supreme  Council,  based  upon  esti 
mates  of  the  Finance  Committee. 

SEC.  7.  The  Standing  Committee  upon 
Finance  shall  be  nominated  by  the  Su 
preme  Commander,  and  confirmed  by  a 
vote  of  two-thirds  of  the  Supreme  Council 
at  each  annual  session ;  and  the  two  mem 
bers  unprovided  for  in  the  Supreme  Ordi 
nance,  of  each  of  the  Committees  on  the 
State  of  the  Order  and  Finance,  shall  be 
appointed  and  confirmed  in  like  manner. 
These  committees  shall  report  and  recom 
mend  at  each  annual  and  extra  session. 

EXTENSION    OF    THE    ORDER. 

SEC.  8.  For  the  purpose  of  extending  the 
Order  into  States  and  Territories,  where  it 
does  not  now  exist,  it  is  hereby  declared 
that  full  authority  for  this  purpose,  is  vested 
in  the  Supreme  Commander,  or  duly  quali 
fied  Supreme  Councilors  in  the  following 
manner,  viz. :  They  may,  at  the  instance  of 
five  good  men,  in  any  State  or  Territory,  in 
stitute  County  Temples,  and  when  a  suffi 
cient  number  of  such  County  Temples  have 
been  instituted,  they  may  establish  a  State 
Council,  the  duly  elected  delegates  of  which 
shall  be  admitted  to  this  Supreme  Council 
upon  an  equality  with  the  organized  States 
or  Territories. 

FINANCE    COMMITTEE. 

SEC.  9.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Fi 
nance  Committee,  at  each  meeting,  to  audii 
all  accounts  which  shall  be  presented,  anc 


:o  examine  the  books  and  accounts  of  the 
Dlerk  and  Treasurer,  and  report  to  the 
Supreme  Council. 

MILEAGE    AND    PER    DIEM. 

SEC.  10.  That  for  the  purpose  of  defraying 

the  expenses  of  delegates  to  the  Supreme 

ouncil,    it   is   hereby   left   to   each    State 

lrand  Council  to  fix,  determine,  and  pay  in 

the  manner   and  to  the  extent  that  such 

State  may  determine. 

SEC.  11.  That  the  Treasurer  of  the  Su 
preme  Council  shall,  before  entering  upon 
the  duties  of  his  oflice,  take  the  oath  re 
quired,  and  give  bond  in  a  sum  double  the 
amount  of  funds  likely  to  come  into  his 
hands. 

SEC.  12.  The  Clerk  of  the  Supreme  Coun- 
il  shall  keep  an  accurate  journal  of  all  its 
proceedings,  draw  orders  on  the  Treasurer 
for  all  claims  that  are  presented  and  prop 
erly  audited  by  the  Finance  Committee; 
collect  all  dues  from  the  States,  receipt  for 
and  pay  the  same  over  to  the  Treasurer, 
and  preserve  and  keep  all  records  and 
papers  belonging  to  the  Council. 

SEC.  13.  All  laws  and  resolutions  of  the 
Supreme  Council  shall  be  signed  by  the 
Clerk,  countersigned  by  the  Supreme  Com 
mander,  and  attested  by  the  seal  of  the 
order. 

SEC.  14.  The  Standing  Committees  of  the 
Supreme  Council  shall  consist  of  a  Commit 
tee  on  Finance,  a  Committee  on  the  State 
of  the  Order,  and  a  Committee  on  Military 
Affairs. 

SEC.  15.  Delegates  to  the  Supreme  Coun 
cil,  before  entering  upon  the  duties  of  their 
office,  shall  take  an  oath  to  support  and 
maintain  the  principles  of  the  order. 

SEC.  16.  The  government  of  the  order  in 
the  States  shall  be  vested  in  a  Grand  Coun 
cil,  composed  of  not  less  than  one  delegate 
from  each  county,  and  a  Grand  Commander 
and  Deputy  Grand  Commander,  elected  by 
said  Councils,  in  such  manner  as  they  may 
provide. 

SEC.  17.  The  Grand  Commanders  shall  be 
the  presiding  officers  of  the  Grand  Councils 
of  the  States,  execute  all1  laws  passed  by 
such  Councils,  and  shall  be  commanders-in- 
chief  of  the  military  forces  of  their  respec 
tive  States. 

SEC.  18.  This  Constitution  shall  be  the 
supreme  law  of  the  order,  and  may  be 
amended  by  a  two-thirds  vote  of  the  Su 
preme  Council. 


PROCEEDINGS 

OT   THE 

GBAND  COUNCIL  OF  THE  STATE  OF  INDIANA, 

At  their  Meeting,  held  on  the  IGth  and  nth  of  Feb.,  18G4. 

The  within  proceedings  are  published  in 
compliance  with  the  following  resolution  : 

"  Resolved,  That  the  Grand  Secretary  pre 
pare  and  publish,  in  pamphlet  form,  the 


316 


TREASON    TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


address  of  the  Grand  Commander,  with 
Buch  part  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Grand 
Council,  as  may  be  necessary  for  the  infor 
mation  of  the  County  Temples,  and  send 
one  copy  of  said  publication  to  each  County 
Temple." 

COUNCILORS  :  For  the  honor  you  have  done 
rne,  in  fixing  a  time  to  hear  my  views  and 
suggestions  in  relation  to  this  organization, 
and  general  matters,  I  feel  duly  sensible, 
and  am  only  sorry  that  I  am  so  illy  pre 
pared  to  meet  your  expectations. 

We  are  organized  for  a  high  and  noble 
purpose,  the  erection  and  consecration  of 
Temples  to  the  service  of  true  Republican 
ism;  altars  upon  which  we  may  lay  our 
hands  and  hearts' with  the  invocation,  "God 
of  our  Fathers."  Well  may  we  call  upon 
the  God  of  truth,  justice,  and  human 
rights,  in  our  efforts  to  preserve  what  the 
great  wisdom  and  heroic  acts  of  our  fathers 
achieved. 

This,  my  friends,  is  no  small  undertak 
ing — requiring  patience,  fortitude,  patriot 
ism,  and  a  self-sacrificing  disposition  from 
each  and  all,  and  may  require  us  to  hazard 
life  itself,  in  support  and  defense  of  those 
great  cardinal  principles  which  are  the 
foundation  stones  of  the  State  and  Federal 
Governments.  It  is  the  boast  of  those  who, 
for  long  centuries,  have  fostered  and  kept 
alive  brotherly  love  and  mutual  protection, 
among,  not  only  the  civilized,  but  in  some 
degree  the  semi-barbarous  nations  of  the 
earth,  that  they  have  attained  now  apparent 
great  results,  through  trials,  tribulations, 
long  suffering  and  persecutions.  So,  too, 
the  worshipers  of  God,  be  they  Jew  or  Gentile, 
claim  to  more  distinctly  merit  an  identity 
and  name,  in  consequence  of  the  immi 
nent  perils  and  innumerable  conflicts,  which 
have  been  thrown  in  their  way  to  impede 
their  progress.  So  may  we,  and  doubtless 
will,  point  with  pride  to  our  present  troubles, 
in  the  future,  to  prove  our  great  worth. 
This  great  brotherhood  is  entitled  now  to 
the  respect  of  mankind,  for  the  part  it  en 
acted  in  the  period  anterior  to  the  Revolu 
tion  of  1776.  Through  it  the  Declaration 
was  made,  and  the  independence  of  the 
States  achieved.  This  alone  would  endear  it 
to  every*  patriot  heart,  to  every  lover  of  re 
publican  institutions ;  if  its  history  should 
stop  here,  when  its  operations  were  sus 
pended,  it  were  certainly  enough — but  still 
more  glorious,  superlatively  brilliant,  wrill 
be  its  history,  when  reinstated  as  it  now  is, 
it  shall  restore  to  this  great  people  their 
fireside  rights,  a  pure  elective  franchise,  and  an 
untrammeled  judiciary;  when  fanatical  usurp 
ers  and  would-be  tyrants  and  dictators  are 
swept  away  with  the  rubbish  that  has  been 
thrown  to  the  surface  in  these  extraordin 
ary  times;  when  once  more  the  governing 
principle  shall  be  the  will  of  the  governed 
expressly  declared;  when  no  more  power 
shall  be  exercised  than  is  or  has  been  de 


rived  from  the  people,  the  legitimate  source 
of  all  power. 

The  great  principle  now  in  issue,  is  the 
centralization  of  power,  or  the  keeping  it 
diffused  in  State  sovereignty,  as  it  is  by  the 
organic  laws,  constituting  States  and  form 
ing  the  General  Government. 

The  creation  of  an  empire,  or  republic,  or 
the  reconstruction  of  the  old  Union,  by 
brute  force,  is  simply  impossible.  The  lib 
eration  of  four  million  blacks,  and  putting 
them  upon  an  equality  writh  the  whites,  is  a 
scheme  which  can  only  brin^  its  authors 
into  shame,  contempt  and  contusion.  No 
results  of  this  enterprise  will  ever  be  real 
ized  beyond  the  army  of  occupation. 

It  is  not  the  part  of  wisdom,  for  those 
who  have  in  hand  the  noble  work  of  pre 
serving  the  States  from  ruin,  and  the  races 
from  intermixture,  to  base  their  action  upon 
any  incident  or  accident,  or  upon  any  sup 
posed  termination  of  our  present  troubles. 
He  who  changes  his  views  upon  victory  or 
defeat,  is  but  a*  poor  soldier  for  a  long  cam 
paign  against  the  mass  of  error,  corruption 
and  crime,  now  thickly  spread  over  and 
through  the  body  politic,  and  to  an  alarm 
ing  extent  influencing  the  action  of  the 
American  mind. 

But,  shall  we  stand  aloof  from  political 
alliances,  and  seek  in  our  own  way  to  assist 
in  the  needful  reformation  ?  Shall  we  rely 
entirely  upon  ourselves?  By  no  means— 
when  the  great  end  in  view  can  be  in  the 
least  degree  promoted,  we  should  not  hesi 
tate  to  lend  our  aid  and  support;  but  care 
should  be  taken  that  no  uncertain  path,  or 
devious  ways,  be  entered  upon. 

Let  me  speak  plain — our  political  affinity 
is  unquestionably  with  the  Democratic 
party,  and  if  that  organization  goes  boldly 
to  the  work,  standing  firmly  upon  its  time- 
honored  principles,  maintaining  unsullied 
its  integrity,  it  is  safe  to  presume  that  it 
will  receive  the  moral  and  physical  support 
of  this  wide  extended  association. 

The  great  boast  of  the  Democratic  party 
has  been,  that  it  has  met  and  beaten  back 
the  party  of  centralization,  since  the  forma 
tion  of  the  Union ;  and,  although  it  has 
never  ordained  any  principles  in  regard  to 
the  status  of  the  inferior  races,  it  has  at  all 
times  strictly  adhered  to  the  doctrine  of 
making  it  a  purely  local  matter,  and  leaving 
to  the  States,  by  the  exercise  of  their  re 
served  powers,  to  regulate  it  as  a  domestic 
institution ;  the  maintainance  of  this  doc 
trine,  in  its  intendment  and  general  opera 
tions,  must  be  satisfactory  to  the.  entire 
brotherhood.  Let  no  one  say  we  will  thus 
be  subservient  to  a  party;  rather  will  we  be 
subservient  to  the  demands  of  our  country, 
and  the  cause  in  which  we  have  enlisted. 

There  need  be  no  apprehension  that  a 
war  of  coercion  will  be  continued  by  a  Dem 
ocratic  administration,  if  placed  in  control 
of  public  affairs,  for  with  the  experience  of 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


317 


the  present  one,  which  has  for  three  years, 
with  the  unlimited  resources  of  eighteen 
millions  of  people,  in  men,  money  and  ships, 
won  nothing  but  its  own  disgrace,  and  prob 
able  downfall,  it  is  not  likely  that  another, 
if  it  values  public  estimation,  will  repeat 
the  experiment. 

Neither  have  we  any  reason  to  fear  that 
the  Democratic  party,  in  shaping  the  can 
vass  of  1864,  will  go  out  of  its  way  to  insult 
five  hundred  thousand  of  those  whose 
votes  are  necessary  to  its  success;  let  us 
rather  incline  to  the  belief  that  all  the  ele 
ments  of  opposition  can  and  will  be  united, 
with  no  sacrifice  of  principle  or  manhood, 
to  £rush  out  this  one  now  In  power. 

A  mere  change  of  men  will  avail  nothing, 
without  corresponding  action.  Men,  states 
men,  and  executive  officers,  exhort  people 
to  patience  and  long  suffering,  and  while 
condemning  Federal  usurpation,  yield  obe 
dience  to  all  its  demands.  In  the  estima 
tion  of  the  membership  of  this  organization, 
such  men  and  such  governors,  be  they  of 
what  party  they  may,  must  be  regarded  as 
enemies  to  good  government.  I  trust  I 
may  be  pardoned  if  I  give  a  few  examples 
to  illustrate. 

If  this  people  can  not  excuse  the  Federal 
Executive  for  exercising  undue  and  unwar 
ranted  power,  toward  breaking  down  their 
rights,  derived  from  the  force  of  their  State 
Governments,  how  shall  they  palliate  the 
offense  of  Governor  Seymcair,  in  violating 
his  obligations  in  allowing  it  to  be  done  in 
the  great  State  of  New  York  ?  This  Gover 
nor  becomes  accessory  after  the  fact,  and  is 
alike  worthy  of  public  condemnation.  Do 
you  tell  me  it  is  a  necessity  to  thus  sub 
serve  the  Washington  usurpers?  In  God's 
name,  do  not  tell  me  that  it  is  a  necessity 
to  be  forsworn,  to  violate  the  plainest  pro 
visions  of  the  Constitution,  to  consign  a 
people  to  a  slavish  subserviency  to  the  will 
of  one  man.  You  may  tell  me  that  it  is  rather 
a  necessity  to  give  up  place,  aye,  to  give  up 
life  itself.  Because  the  punishment  of 
these  crimes  against  law  and  the  people, 
being  impeachment,  and  lodged  with  legis 
lative  bodies,  that  will  not  execute  it,  they 
are  nevertheless  offenses,  and  will  be. so  ad 
judged  hereafter,  when  healthy  restraints 
of  law  shall  be  demanded  to  protect  life 
and  property. 

The  Democracy  of  Indiana,  too,  has  made 
a  culprit  of  itself.  A  Senator,  by  the  mean 
and  contemptible  action  of  a  majority  of 
the  United  States  Senate,  was  wrongfully 
and  maliciously  expelled  from  his  seat.  The 
Legislature  plainly  acquiesced  in  this  insult 
to  the  State  and  the  party,  by  refusing  to 
return  him  again.  Again,  our  cherished 
Vallandigham  resides  in  exile,  not  so  much 
by  the  power  of  Lincoln,  as  the  demands  of 
those  who  are  controlling,  or  did  control 
the  Democratic  party  in  that  State. 

These  things  are  of  the  past,  shall  they 


be  repeated  in  the  future  ?  The  great  fear 
is,  that  they  will  be,  so  long  as  this  bugbear 
of  civil  war  shall  continue  to  horrify  other 
wise  sensible  people.  My  advice  to  you  is, 
look  well  to  the  selection  of  men,  upon 
whom  you  devolve  the  functions  of  leaders. 
This  is  no  time  to  put  forward  men  who 
take  counsel  of  their  fears. 

Will  the  exercise  of  an  undoubted  right, 
an  inalienable,  an  inherited,  a  constitutional 
right,  lead  to  conflict?  Will  opposition  to 
usurpers,  to  dictators,  to  tyrants,  who  have 
broken  down  the  safeguards  of  life  and 
property,  lead  to  it?  Then  there  is  no  es 
cape,  save  in  dishonor,  and  the  most  potent 
argument  in  favor  of  the  permanency  and 
spread  of  this  association  lies  in  the  fact, 
that  there  are  men  who  desire  place  and 
those  who  desire  peace  and  quiet  upon  such 
terms.  But  who  will  bring  conflict  ?  Who 
will  commence  hostilities  ?  Certainly  not 
those  who  are  merely  claiming  their  rights? 
The  conflict  must  then  be  commenced  by 
those  who  are  in  the  wrong.  Must  a  people, 
therefore,  continue  to  abase  themselves,  to 
keep  those  whom  they  have  placed  in  author 
ity  from  committing  outrages  upon  them  ? 
This  is  the  strange  logic  of  the  times. 

This  organization  is  based  upon  the  prin 
ciple  of  conserving  the  government  inaugu 
rated  by  the  people,  and  bound  to  oppose  all 
usurpations  of  power.  Now  it  so  happens 
that  in  the  seventh  year  of  its  re-establish 
ment,  we  find  our  State  and  Federal  Gov 
ernment  overturned.  Yes,  'tis  true.  Lin 
coln's  government  is  an  usurpation — Mor 
ton's  government  is  an  usurpation.  Now  I 
know  not  what  others  may  do,  but  for  my 
self,  I  am  willing  the  ballot  box  shall  decide 
who  shall  be  the  officers,  under  the  law  and 
Constitution;  but  I  shall  obey  them  only  so 
far  as  they  exercise  their  delegated  powers. 
I  will  not  agree  to  renfain  passive,  under 
usurped  authority,  affecting  my  rights  and 
liberties. 

Now,  if  the  present  condition  can  be 
changed  by  the  ballot,  all  will  rejoice ;  but 
how  will  the  ballot  decide  any  thing,  when 
the  dominant  party  of  the  country  appeal 
from  it  to  force?  No  one  will  enter  the  con 
test  to  overturn  this  party,  more  cheerfully 
than  will  I.  But  suppose  it  re-elects  itself, 
will  it  return  to  the  Constitution  and  laws  ? 
Are  all  those  who  do  not  agree  with  them 
to  enter  upon  that  delightful  future,  which 
has  been  so  often  and  boastfully  predicted 
by  the  Executive  of  this  State,  and  many 
of  his  appointees  ?  That  future  to  you  and 
to  me  is  death,  confiscation  of  our  property, 
starvation  of  our  children,  the  forced  mar 
riage  of  our  heirs  to  their  new-made  colored 
brethren  in  arms. 

If  these  men  be  prolonged  in  power,  they 
must  either  consent  to  be  content  to  exer 
cise  the  power  delegated  by  the  people,  or 
by  the  gods  they  must  prove  themselves 
physically  the  stronger.  This  position  is 


318 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


demanded  by  every  true  member  of  this 
fraternity,  honor,  life — aye,  more  than  life, 
the  virtue  of  our  wives  and  daughters  de 
mand  it;  and  if  you  intend  to  make  this 
organization  of  any  practical  value,  you  will 
do  one  of  two  things — either  take  steps  to 
work  the  political  regeneration  of  the  party 
with  which  we  are  affiliated,  up  to  this 
standard,  or  relying  upon  ourselves,  deter 
mine  at  once  our  plan  of  action. 

It  might  be  asked  now,  shall  men  be 
coerced  to  go  to  war,  in  a  mere  crusade  to 
free  negroes,  and  territorial  aggrandizement? 
Shall  our  people  be  taxed  to  carry  forward 
a  war  of  emancipation,  miscegenation,  con 
fiscation,  or  extermination? 

It  would  be  the  happiest  day  of  my  life, 
if  I  could  stand  up  with  any  considerable 
portion  of  my  fellow  men  and  say,  "Not  an 
other  dollar,  not  another  man,  for  this  ne 
farious  war."  But  the  views  and  suggestions 
of  exiled  Vallandigham  will  be  of  greater 
consequence  to  you  than  my  own.  He  says 
to  you,  the  only  issue  now  is  peace,  or  war. 
To  the  former  he  is  committed,  and  can 
not,  will  not  retract.  He  tells  us  not  to 


commit  ourselves  to  men.    As  well 


he 


loves,  and  much  as  he  admires  the  little 
hero  McClellan,  he  would  have  the  Chicago 
Convention  act  with  untrammeled  freedom. 
He  reasons  that  the  spring  campaign  will 
be  more  disastrous  to  the  Federal  armies 
than  those  heretofore  made.  That  by  July 
the  increased  call  for  troops,  the  certainty 
of  a  prolonged  war,  the  rottenness  of  the 
financial  system,  defection  of  border  State 
troops,  the  spread  and  adoption  of  the 
principles  of  this  organization,  will  all  tend 
to  bring  conservative  men  to  one  mind. 

He  anticipates  that  the  deliberations  of 
the  Chicago  Convention  will  no  doubt  be 
harmonious,  and  that  its  nominees  will 


and  that  a  conflict  will  ensue  for  the  mas 
tery. 

"Sons  of  Liberty"  arise!  the  day  is  rapidly 
approaching  in  the  which  you  can  make 
good  your  promises  to  your  country.  The 
furnace  is  being  heated  that  will  prove 
your  sincerity — the  hour  for  daring  deeds 
is  not  distant — let  the  watchword  be  on 
ward!  And  let  the  result  bless  mankind 
with  Republican  Government,  in  this,  our 
beloved  land,  to  their  latest  posterity. 

Your  Committee  on  Platform,  having  had 
the  subject  of  a  platform  to  govern  the  ac 
tion  of  the  various  Councils  of  the  State  of 
Indiana,  beg  leave  to  report  the  following, 
which  they  recommend  be  adopted  by  this 
Grand  Council: 

WHEREAS,  A  crisis  has  arisen  in  the  his 
tory  of  the  Federal  Government  in  relation 
to  the  rights  of  the  States,  whether  delega 
ted  or  reserved;  the  manifest  usurpations 
of  undelegated  powers  by  the  President; 
the  utter  disregard  of  all  Constitutional 
guarantees  of  liberty,  looking  constantly 
to  the  subjugation  of  the  States  and  the 
establishment  of  a  Centralized  Despotism, 
already  fill  us  with  alarm  for  the  cause  of 
civil  liberty  in  America.  AND  WHEREAS,  it 
is  due  to  those  who  differ  with  "us  in  our 
notions  of  right,  as  well  as  the  mode  and 
measure  of  redress,  to  know  where  we 
stand,  we  propose  to  declare  to  them  frankly 
our  convictions  and  purposes  in  the  pre 
mises  ;  therefore, 

Resolved,  That  the  right  to  alter  or  abol 
ish  their  Government,  whenever  it  fails  to 
secure  the  blessings  of  liberty,  is  one  of  the 
inalienable  rights  of  the  people,  that  can 
never  be  surrendered ;  nor  is  the  right  to 
maintain  a  Government  that  does  secure 
the  blessings  of  liberty  less  sacred  and  in- 


carry  a  majority  of  the  adhering  States — 'alienable,  therefore  we  declare  that  patriot- 


thinks  that  Government,  by  the  one-tenth 
proclamation,  will  vote  all  seceded  States, 
and  overcome  us;  and  says  if  this  northern 
people  do  not  inaugurate  the  men  thus 
duly  and  legally  chosen,  they  will  be  want 
ing  in  that  manhood  and  spirit  that  should 
characterize  freemen.  He  wishes  it  dis 
tinctly  understood,  although  pressed  from 
various  quarters,  that  he  will  not  consent 
to  the  use  of  his  name  before  the  conven 
tion  for  a  nomination,  but  thinks,  in  case 
we  succeed,  that  he  would  be  entitled  to 


ism  and  manhood  alike  enjoin  upon  us  re 
sistance  to  usurpation  as  the  highest  and 
holiest  duty  of  freemen. 

2.  That  the  necessity  of  amendments  to 
the  Articles  of  Confederation  was  suggested 
by  a  prevailing  insurrection;  its  provisions 
matured  amidst  the  threatening  elementsof 
civil  war,  and  the  Constitution  tendered  to 
the  thirteen  sovereign  and  independent 
States  by  the  wisdom  of  the  age,  and  ac 


cepted  by  them  as  a  fortress  around  the 
liberties  of  the  people,  prescribing  inflexi- 
havo  a  place  in  the  cabinet,  (may  he  get  it,  ble  limits  to  the  powers  of  the  Government 
and  not  say  like  General  Taylor,  that  he  Jin  war  as  well  as  in  peace,  and  no  necessity, 
has  "no  friends  to  reward  and  no  enemies  however  great,  can  warrant  its  violation  by 
to  punish.")  He  counsels  late  action  on i any  officer  of  the  Government;  and  every 
conventions;  thinks  Ohio  such  infraction  should  be  rebuked  bv  the 


the  part  of  State 
is  called  too  soon — advising  that  Indiana 
should  have  hers,  say  first  of  June.  He 
finally  judges  that  the  Washington  power 
will  not  yield  up  its  power,  until  it  is  taken 
from  them  by  an  indignant  people,  by  force 
of  arms.  He  intimates  that  parties — men 
and  interests — will  divide  into  two  classes, 


sternest  energy  of  our  nature. 

3.  That  the  great  purpose  of  the  Constitu 
tion  of  the  United  States  was  the  maintain- 
ance  of  the  principles  of  civil  liberty.  The 
Union  a  means,  formed  in  a  spirit  of  mu 
tual  concession,  can  only  be  restored  and 
perpetuated  by  an  adherence  to  the  princi- 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


319 


pies  upon  which  it  was  founded,  the  volun 
tary  consent  of  itsmemberSj^ind  ascrupulous 
observance  of  the  rights  of  each  other  un 
der  the  Constitution;  and  that  "war  is  dis 
union,  final,  irretrievable." 

4.  That  while  with  just  disdain  we  reject 
the  epithet  of  "peace   at   any  price"   as  a 
slander  upon  the  true  Democracy,  and  with 
instinctive  promptness  protest  against  the 
brutal  doctrine  of  war  for  revenge,  for  plun 
der,  or  the  debasement  of  our  race  to  the 
level  of  a  negro,  we  do  regard   the  restora 
tion  of  peace  to  our  country,  upon  an  hon 
orable  adjustment  of  the  issues  involved  in 
this    unholy  and    unnatural    war,  without 
humiliation  to  either  party,  as  rising  above 
all  other  considerations,  and  that  in  pon 
dering  the   terms  of  such    settlement  we 
will  look  only  to  the  peace  and  welfare  of 
our  race. 

5.  That  whatever  the  theory  of  the  pow 
ers  of  the  Federal  Government  to  coerce  a 
State  to  remain  in  the  Union  may  be,  war 
as  a  means  of  restoring  the  Union  is  a  de 
lusion,  involving  a  fearful  waste  of  human 
life,  hopeless  bankruptcy,  and  the  speedy 
downfall  of   the    Republic.     Therefore  we 
recommend  a  cessation  of  hostilities  upon 
existing    facts,    and    a  convention  of    the 
sovereign  States  to  adjust  the  terms  of  a 
peace  with  a  view  to  the  restoration  of  the 
Union,  entire  if  possible;  if  not,  so  much 
and  such  parts  as  the  affinities  of  interest 
and  civilization  may  attract. 

G.  That  there  is  a  point  at  which  submis 
sion  merges  the  man  in  the  slave,  and  re 
sistance  becomes  a  duty.  Whether  that 
point,  in  the  history  of  the  times,  has  ar 
rived,  may  be  debated ;  but  we  will  resist 
by  force  any  attempt  to  abridge  the  elec 
tive  franchise,  whether  by  introduction  of 
illegal  votes,  under  military  authority, 
or  the  attempt  by  Federal  officers  to  in 
timidate  the  citizen  by  threats  of  oppres 
sion. 

7.  We  reiterate  and  affirm  the  Virginia 
and    Kentucky  Resolutions  of  1798-99,  as 
embodying  the  true  exposition  of  the  Con 
stitution. 

8.  That  we  will  support  and  maintain  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  of  the 
State  of  Indiana,  and  of  the  laws  enacted 
under  the  same,  as  passed  by  theproper  legis 
lative  authorities,  and  as  expounded  by  the 
proper  judicial  tribunals. 

°.  That  we  will  maintain,  peaceably  if  we 
can,  but  forcibly  if  we  must,  the  freedom 
of  speech,  the  freedom  of  the  press,  the 
freedom  of  the  person  from  arbitrary  and 
unlawful  arrest,  and  the  freedom  of  the 
ballot  box,  from  the  aggression  and  violence 
of  every  person  or  authority  whatsoever. 
And  to  these  ends  we  hereby  pledge  to 
each  other,  and  to  our  brethren  throughout 
the  United  States  and  the  State  of  Indi 
ana,  our  lives,  our  fortunes,  and  our  sacred 
honor. 


REPORT    OF    THE    FINANCE    COMMITTEE. 

To  the  Grand  Council  of  Indiana : 

Your  committee  beg  leave  to  submit  to 
this  honorable  body  the  following  report: 

It  being  of  the  greatest  importance  that 
the  Grand  Council  be  amply  provided  with 
the  necessary  means  to  meet  the  urgent  de 
mands  upon  it,  at  this  period  of  its  organic 
existence,  and  that  without  sufficient  funds 
in  its  treasury,  no  permanent  or  systematic 
organization  of  the  State  can  be  effected, 
would  first  urge  upon  every  Parent  Temple, 
who  has  not  already  responded  to  the  pre 
vious  assessment  of  $2000,  made  by  the 
Grand  Council,  on  each  county  or  Parent 
Temple,  the  necessity  of  meeting  that  de 
mand  without  any  further  delay.  And 
second,  that  in  order  to  provide,  an  annual 
fund  for  the  use  of  this  Grand  Council, 
that  each  county  or  Parent  Temple  be  re 
quired  to  pay  into  the  treasury  of  the 
Grand  Council,  on  the  first  Monday  in  May, 
1864,  and  annually  thereafter,  until  other 
wise  ordered  by  the  Grand  Council,  for 
each  member  in  the  county  who  has  re 
ceived  the  first  degree,  the  sum  of  twenty 
cents.  This  assessment  to  include  all  mem 
bers  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty  in  each  county 
throughout  the  State,  whether  members  of 
the  Parent  Temple  or  the  subordinate  Tem 
ples  throughout  the  townships.  And  they 
would  recommend  that  the  demands  of 
the  Supreme  Council,  on  this  Grand  Coun 
cil,  be  paid  out  of  the  funds  to  be  provi 
ded  by  the  foregoing  assessment.  And 
they  would  also  recommend  that  the 
Grand  Treasurer  be  required  to  give  bond 
in  double  the  amount  of  money  that  may 
come  into  his  possession,  by  virtue  of  his 
office,  conditioned  for  the  faithful  per 
formance  of  his  duties — such  bond  to  be 
given  to  the  Grand  Commander,  on  or  be 
fore  the  first  day  of  May,  1864,  and  after 
ward  upon  entering  upon  the  duties  of 
that  office. 

REPORT  OF  THE  GRAND  SECRETARY. 

M.   E.   Grand    Commander: 

In  compliancewith  the  resolution  adopted 
by  this  body,  I  beg  leave  to  submit  the  fol 
lowing  report,  showing  the  number  of  coun 
ties  in  the  State  that  are  organized ;  the 
number  in  process  of  organization,  and 
the  number  of  members  in  the  organiza 
tion,  so  far  as  1  have  received  reports : 

Reports  have  been  received  from  but 
seventeen  counties.  We  have  organized  in 
the  State  forty-one  counties,  and  have  in 
process  of  organization  ten  additional  coun 
ties,  leaving  the  number  of  counties  yet  to 
report  their  membership,  thirty-four. 

Judging  from  the  reports  received,  I 
place  the  "membership  in  the  State,  at  this 
time,  at  least  12,000,  not  including  the 
membership  in  the  other  organizations  in 
the  State,  that  work  conjunctly  with  us.  The 


320 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


following  is  a  summary  of  the  reports  re 
ceived:  Grant  county  reports  201  members 
and  6  branches;  Clay  county  reports  194 
members  and  3  branches;  Blackford  coun 
ty  reports  50  members  and  no  branches ; 
DeKalb  county  reports  34  members  and  no 
branches-,  Harrison  county  reports  615  mem 
bers  and  11  branches;  Marshall  county  re 
ports  30  members  and  no  branches;  Wash 
ington  county  reports  1,100  members  and 
10  branches',  Allen  county  reports  40  mem 
bers  and  no  branches;  Brown  county  re 
ports  322  members  and  4  branches ;  Wells 
county  reports  51  members  and  no  branches; 
Vigo  county  reports  500  members  and  5 
branches;  Fountain  county  reports  373 
members  and  10  branches ;  Sullivan  county 
reports 600 members  and  10 branches;  Parke 
county  reports  533  members  and  7  branches; 
Marion  county  reports  75  members  and  1 
branch;  Vermillion  •  county  reports  135 
members  and  3  branches;  Vanderburg 
county  reports  200  members  and  no  branch 
es.  Showing  a  total  membership,  in  the 
counties  reporting,  of  5,053. 

The  above  report  does  not  include  those 
counties  from  whom  have  been  received  in 
telligence,  unofficially,  of  their  organiza 
tion,  which  would  perhaps  increase  the 
number  of  counties  organized  and  in  pro 
cess  of  organization  to — say  sixty-one. 

The  above  reportis  respectfully  submitted. 

Resolved,  That  it  is  the  instruction  and 
advice  of  this  Grand  Council  to  the  differ 
ent  temples  of  the  State,  that  they  proceed  [ 
forthwith  and  perfect  a  thorough  organiza 
tion  of  their  respective  counties,  and  there 
by  prepare  themselves  to  carry  into  effect 
any  and  every  order  of  this  body. 

Resolved,  That  the  delegates  present,  re 
port  the  number  of  subscribers  obtained, 


or  that  can  be  obtained  for  the  Constitution 
alist,  the  proposed  organ  of  the  order. 

Reports  on  the  above  resolution  gave  as 
surance  that  the  subscription  lists  of  the 
Constitutionalist  should  be  immediately  taken 
in  hand;  and  that  at  least  10,000  subscri 
bers  could,  and  would  be  obtained. 

At  this  meeting  of  the  Grand  Council, 
thirty-one  counties  were  represented,  and 
there  is  no  doubt,  had  it  not  been  for 
the  extreme  cold,  every  organized  county 
in  the  State  would  have  been  present 
through  their  delegates. 

The  organization  in  this  State  is  in  its  in 
fancy,  and  when  we  reflect  that  we  have 
succeeded  in  organizing,  in  the  short  space 
of  six  months,  over  one -half  the  counties 
in  the  State,  and  have  a  membership  num 
bering  over  12,000,  we  have  every  reason  to 
feel  encouraged  for  the  future. 

The  organization  is  extending  its  influ 
ence,  popularity,  and  usefulness  daily,  and 
is  already  at  work  in  the  States  of  New 
York,  New  Jersey,  Pennsylvania,  New 
Hampshire,  Connecticut,  Ohio,  Indiana, 
Illinois,  Michigan,  Delaware,  Maryland,  and 
Missouri,  and  numbers  in  its  membership 
many  of  the  noblest  and  most  devoted 
champions  of  civil  and  religious  liberty, 
remaining  in  our  unhappy  and  distracted 
country. 

In  conclusion,  it  is  urged  upon  our  friends 
in  the  counties  to  work  with  untiring  en 
ergy  for  the  purpose  of  thorough  organi 
zation.  This  is  the  first  and  only  truly  na 
tional  organization  the  Democratic  and 
Conservative  men  of  the  country  have 
ever  attempted,  and  we  are  assured  that 
through  it,  and  it  only,  can  the  peace,  har- 
mony  and  union  of  these  States  ever  be 
restored. 


OFFICIAL    REPORT 

OP    THE 

JUDGE  ADVOCATE  GENERAL 

ON   THE 

"ORDER    OF    AMERICAN    KNIGHTS," 

OR 

"SONS    OF    LIB  E  RT  Y."   * 

A  WESTERN  CONSPIRACY  IN  AID  OF  THE  SOUTHERN  REBELLION. 

21 


KEPORT. 


WAB  DEPAETMENT,  BUREAU  OF  MILITARY  JUSTICE,     ) 
WASHINGTON,  D.  C.,  October  8,  1864.) 

Hon.  E.  M.  Stanton,  Secretary  of   War : 

SIR:  Having  been  instructed  by  you  to 
prepare  a  detailed  report  upon  the  mass  of 
testimony  furnished  me  from  different 
sources  in  regard  to  the  Secret  Associations 
and  Conspiracies  against  the  Government,  formed, 
principally  in  the  Western  States,  by  trai 
tors  and  disloyal  persons,  I  have  now  the 
honor  to  submit  as  follows : 

During  more  than  a  year  past  it  has  been 
generally  known  to  our  military  authorities 
that  a  secret  treasonable  organization,  affi 
liated  with  the  Southern  rebellion,  and 
chiefly  military  in  its  character,  has  been 
rapidly  extending  itself  throughout  the 
West.  A  variety  of  agencies,  which  will  be 
specified  herein,  have  been  employed,  and 
successfully,  to  ascertain  its  nature  and  ex 
tent,  as  well  as  its  aims  and  its  results;  and, 
as  this  investigation  has  led  to  the  arrest  in 
several  States  of  a  number  of  its  prominent 
members  as  dangerous  public  enemies,  it  has 
been  deemed  proper  to  set  forth  in  full  the 
acts  and  purposes  of  this  organization,  and 
thus  to  make  known  to  the  country  at  large 
its  intensely  treasonable  and  revolution 
ary  spirit. 

The  subject  will  be  presented  under  the 
following  heads : 

I.  The  origin,  history,  names,  etc.,  of  the 
order. 

II.  Its  organization  and  officers. 

III.  Its  extent  and  numbers. 

IV.  Its  armed  force. 

V.  Its  ritual,  oaths,  and  interior  forms. 
VI.  Its  written  principles. 
VII.  Its  specific  purposes  and  operations. 
VIII.  The  witnesses  and  their  testimony. 

L — THE    ORIGIN,   HISTORY,    NAMES,    ETC.,  OF   THE 
ORDER. 

This  secret  association  first  developed  it 
self  in  the  West  in  the  year  1862,.  about  the 
period  of  the  first  conscription  of  troops, 
which  it  aimed  to  obstruct  and  resist.  Orig 
inally  known  in  certain  localities  as  the 
"Mutual  Protection  Society,"  the  "Circle  of 
Honor,"  or  the  "Circle,"  or  "Knights  of  the 
Mighty  Host,"  but  more  widely  as  the 
"Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle,"  it  was  sim 
ply  an  inspiration  of  the  rebellion,  being 
little  other  than  an  extension  among  the 
disloyal  and  disaffected  at  the  North  of  the 
association  of  the  latter  name,  which  had 
existed  for  some  years  at  the  South,  and 
from  which  it  derived  all  the  chief  features 
of  its  organization. 


During  the  summer  and  fall  of  1863  the 
order,  both  at  the  North  and  South,  under 
went  some  modifications  as  well  as  a  change 
of  name.  In  consequence  of  a  partial  ex 
posure  which  had  been  made  of  the  signs 
and  ritual  of  the  "Knights  of  the  Golden 
Circle,"  Sterling  Price  had  instituted  as  its 
successor  in  Missouri  a  secret  political  asso 
ciation,  which  he  called  the  "  Corps  de  Bel- 
gique,"  or  "Southern  League;"  his  principal 
coadjutor  being  Charles  L.  Hunt,  of  St. 
Louis,  then  Belgian  Consul  at  that  city,  but 
whose  exequatur  was  subsequently  revoked 
by  the  President  on  account  of  his  disloyal 
practices.  The  special  object  of  the  Corps 
de  Belgique  appears  to  have  been  to  unite 
the  rebel  sympathizers  of  Missouri,  with  a 
view  to  their  taking  up  arms  and  joining 
Price  upon  his  proposed  grand  invasion  of 
that  State,  and  to  their  recruiting  for  his 
army  in  the  interim. 

Meanwhile,  also,  there  had  been  insti 
tuted  at  the  North,  in  the  autumn  of  1863, 
by  sundry  disloyal  persons  —  prominent 
among  whom  were  Vallandigham  and  P.  C. 
Wright,  of  New  York — a  secret  order,  in 
tended  to  be  general  throughout  the  coun 
try,  and  aiming  at  an  extended  influence 
and  power,  and  at  more  positive  results 
than  its  predecessor,  and  which  was  termed, 
and  has  since  been  widely  known  as  the  0. 
A.  K.,  or  "Order  of  American  Knights" 

The  opinion  is  expressed  by  Colonel  San 
derson,  Provost  Marshal  General  of  the  De 
partment  of  Missouri,  in  his  official  report 
upon  the  progress  of  this  order,  that  it  was 
founded  by  Vallandigham  during  his  ban 
ishment,  and  upon  consultation  at  Kich- 
mond  with  Davis  and  other  prominent  trai 
tors.  It  is,  indeed,  the  boast  of  the  order  in 
Indiana  and  elsewhere,  that  its  "ritual" 
came  direct  from  Davis  himself;  and  Mary 
Ann  Pitman,  formerly  attached  to  the  com 
mand  of  the  rebel  Forrest,  and  a  most  in 
telligent  witness — whose  testimony  will  be 
hereafter  referred  to — states  positively  that 
Davis  is  a  member  of  the  order. 

Upon  the  institution  of  the  principal  or 
ganization,  it  is  represented  that  the  "Corps 
de  Belgique"  was  modified  by  Price,  and 
became  a  Southern  section  of  the  Order  of 
American  Knights,  and  that  the  new  name 
was  generally  adopted  for  the  order,  both  at 
the  North  and  South. 

The  secret  signs  and  character  of  the 
order  having  become  known  to  our  military 
authorities,  further  modifications  in  tho 
ritual  and  forms  were  introduced,  and  its 
name  was  finally  changed  to  that  of  0.  S.  L., 

323 


324 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


or  "Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty"  or  the 
"Knights  of  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Lib 
erty."  These  later  changes  are  represented 
to  have  been  first  instituted,  and  the  new 
ritual  compiled,  in  the  State  of  Indiana,  in 
May  last,  but  the  new  name  was  at  once 
generally  adopted  throughout  the  West, 
though  in  some  localities  the  association  is 
still  better  known  as  the  "  Order  of  Ameri 
can  Knights." 

Meanwhile,  also,  the  order  has  received 
certain  local  designations.  In  parts  of  Illi 
nois  it  has  been  called  at  times  the  "Peace 
Organization,"  in  Kentucky  the  "Star  Or 
ganization,"  and  in  Missouri  the  "American 
Organization;"  these,  however,  being  ap 
parently  names  used  outside  of  the  lodges 
of  the  order.  Its  members  have  also  been 
familiarly  designated  as  "Butternuts"  by 
the  country  people  of  Illinois,  Indiana,  and 
Ohio,  and  its  separate  lodges  have  also  fre 
quently  received  titles  intended  for  the 
public  ear;  that  in  Chicago,  for  instance, 
being  termed  by  its  members  the  i;  Demo 
cratic  Invincible  Club,"  that  in  Louisville 
the  "Democratic  Heading  Room,"  etc. 

It  is  to  be  added  that  in  the  State  of  New 
York,  and  other  parts  of  the  North,  the  se 
cret  political  association  known  as  the  "  Mc- 
Clcllan  Minute  Guard'1  would  seem  to  be  a 
branch  of  the  Order  of  American  Knights, 
having  substantially  the  same  objects,  to  be 
accomplished,  however,  by  means  expressly 
suited  to  the  localities  in  which  it  is  estab 
lished.  For,  as  the  Chief  Secretary  of  this 
association,  Dr.  R.  F.  Stevens,  stated  in  June 
last  to  a  reliable  witness  whose  testimony 
has  been  furnished,  "those  who  represent 
the  McClellan  interest  are  compelled  to 
preach  a  vigorous  prosecution  of  the  war, 
in  order  to  secure  the  popular  sentiment 
and  allure  voters." 

II. ITS    ORGANIZATION  AND    OFFICERS. 

From  printed  copies,  heretofore  seized  by 
the  Government,  of  the  Constitution  of 
the  Supreme  Council,  Grand  Council,  and 
County  Parent  Temples,  respectively,  of  the 
Order  of  Sons  of  Liberty,  in  connection 
with  other  and  abundant-  testimony,  the 
organization  of  the  order,  in  its  latest  form, 
'  is  ascertained  to  be  as  follows : 

1.  The  government  of  the  order  through 
out  the  United  States  is  vested  in  a  Supreme 
Council,  of  which  the  officers  are  a  Supreme 
Commander,  Secretary  of"  State,  and  Treas 
urer.     These   officers   are    elected   for  one 
year,  at  the  annual  meeting  of  the  Supreme 
Council,  which  is  made  up  of  the  Grand 
Commanders  of  the  several  States  ex  officio, 
and  two  delegates  elected  from  each  State 
in  which  the  order  is  established. 

2.  The   government   of    the   order    in  a 
State  is  vested  in  a  Grand  Council,  the  offi 
cers   of  which   are   a   Grand   Commander, 
Deputy  Grand   Commander,  Grand   Secre 
tary,  Grand  Treasurer,  and  a  certain  num 


ber  of  Major  Generals,  or  one  for  each  Mili 
tary  District.  These  officers  also  are  elected 
annually  by  "representatives"  from  the 
county  temples,  each  temple  being  en 
titled  to  two  representatives,  and  one  addi 
tional  for  each  thousand  members.  This 
body  of  representatives  is  also  invested  with 
certain  legislative  functions. 

3.  The  parent  temple  is  the  organization 
of  the  order  for  a  county,  each  temple  be 
ing  formally  instituted  by  authority  of  the 
Supreme  Council,  or  of  the  Grand  Council  or 
Grand  Commander  of  the  State.  By  the 
same  authorityror  by  that  of  the  officers  of 
the  parent  temple,  branch  or  subordinate 
temples  may  be  established  for  townships 
in  the  county. 

But  the  strength  and  significance  of  this 
organization  lie  in  its  military  character.  The 
secret  constitution  of  the  Supreme  Council 
provides  that  the  Supreme  Commander 
"  shall  be  commander-in-chief  of  all  military  forces 
belonging  to  the  order  in  the  various  States  when, 
called  into  actual  service ;"  and  further,  that  the  , 
Grand  Commanders  "  shall  be  commanders* 
in-chid'  of  the  military  forces  of  their  respective, 
States."  Subordinate  to  the  Grand  Com 
mander  in  the  State  are  the  "  Major  Gener 
als"  each  of  whom  commands  his  separate 
district  and  army.  In  Indiana  the  Major 
Generals  are  four  in  number.  In  Illinois, 
where  the  organization  of  the  order  is  con 
sidered  most  perfect,  the  mejnbers  in  each 
congressional  district  compose  a  "  brigade" 
which  is  commanded  by  a  "  brigadier  ger*~ 
eral."  The  members  of  each  county  consti 
tute  a  "regiment"  with  a  "colonel"  in  com 
mand,  and  those  of  each  township  form  a 
"  company."  A  somewhat  similar  system 
prevails  in  Indiana,  where  also  each  com 
pany  is  divided  into  "squads"  each  with  it« 
chief — an  arrangement  intended  to  facili 
tate  the  guerrilla  mode  of  warfare  in  case  of 
a  general  outbreak  or  local  disorder. 

The  "  McClellan  Minute  Guard,"  as  ap 
pears  from  a  circular  issued  by  the  Chief 
Secretary  in  New  York  in  March  last,  is  or 
ganized  upon  a  military  basis  similar  to  that 
of  the  order  proper.  It  is  composed  of 
companies,  one  for  each  election  district, 
ten  of  which  constitute  a  "  brigade,"  With 
a  "brigadier  general"  at  its  head.  _The 
whole  is  placed  under  the  authority~of  a 
" commander-in-chief."  A  strict  obedience 
on  the  part  of  members  to  the  orders  of 
their  superiors  is  c-njoined. 

The  first  "Supreme  Commander"  of  the 
order  was  P.  C.  Wright,  of  New  York,  edi 
tor  of  the  New  York  News,  who  was  in  May 
last  placed  in  arrest  and  confined  in  Fort 
Lafayette.  His  successor  in  office  was  "Val- 
landigham,  who  was  elected  at  the  annual 
meeting  of  the  Supreme  Council  in  l;ebru- 
ary  last.  Robert  IIollowayr  of  Illinois,  i* 
represented  to  have  acted  as  Lieutenant 
General,  or  Deputy  SuprenJe  Commander, 
during  the  absence  of  Vallandigham  from 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


325 


the  country.  The  Secretary  of  State  chosen 
at  the  last  election  was  Dr.  Massey,  of  Ohio. 

In  Missouri,  the  principal  officers  were 
Charles  L.  Hunt,  Grand  Commander,  Chas. 
E.  Dunn,  Deputy  Grand  Commander,  and 
Green  B.  Smith,  Grand  Secretary.  Since 
the  arrest  of  these  three  persons  (all  of 
whom  have  made  confessions  which  will  be 
presently  alluded  to),  James  A.  Barrett  has, 
as  it  is  understood,  officiated  as  Grand  Com 
mander.  He  is  stated  to  occupy  also  the 
position  of  chief  of  staff  to  the  Supreme 
Commander. 

The  Grand  Commander  in  Indiana,  IL  H. 
Dodd,  is  now  on  trial  at  Indianapolis  by  a 
military  commission  for  "  conspiracy  against 
the  Government,"  "  violation  of  the  laws  of 
war,"  and  other  charges.  The  Deputy 
Grand  Commander  in  that  State  is  Horace 
Heffren,  and  the  Grand  Secretary,  W.  M. 
Harrison.  The  Major  Generals  are  W.  A. 
Bowles,  John  C.  Walker,  L.  P.  Milligan, 
and  Andrew  Humphreys.  Among  the 
other  leading  members  of  the  order  in  that 
State  are  Dr.  Athoii,  State  Secretary,  and 
Joseph  Ristine,  State  Auditor. 

The  Grand  Commander  in  Illinois  is 

Judd,  of  Lewistown,  and  B.  B.  Piper,  of 
Springfield,  who  is  entitled  "  Grand  Mission 
ary  "  of  the  Sta,te,  and  designated  also  as  a 
member  of  Vallancligham's  staff,  is  one  of 
the  ~most  •  active  members,  having  been 
busily  engaged  throughout  the  summer  in 
establishing  temples  and  initiating  mem 
bers. 

In  Kentucky,  Judge  Bullitt,  of  the  Court 
of  Appeals,  is  Grand  Commander,  and,  with 
Dr.  U.  F.  Kalfus  and  W.  R  Thomas,  jailor 
in  Louisville,  two  other  of  the  most  prom 
inent  members,  has  been  arrested  and  con 
fined  by  the  military  authorities.  In  New 
York,  Dr.  R  F.  Stevens,  the  chief  secretary 
of  the  McClellan  Minute  Guard,  is  the 
most  active  ostensible  representative  of  the 
order. 

The  greater  part  of  the  chief  and  subor 
dinate  officers  of  the  order  and  its  branches, 
as  well  as  the  principal  members  thereof, 
are  known  to  the  Government,  and,  where 
not  already  arrested,  may  regard  them 
selves  as  under  a  constant  military  surveil 
lance.  So  complete  has  been  the  exposure 
of  this  secret  league,  that  however  fre 
quently  the  conspirators  may  change  its 
names,  forms,  passwords,  and  signals,  its 
true  purposes  and  operations  can  not  longer 
be  concealed  from  the  military  authorities. 

It  is  to  be  remarked  that  the  Supreme 
Council  of  the  order,  which  annually  meets 
on  February  22,  convened  this  year  at  New 
York  city,  and  a  special  meeting  was  then  j 
appointed  to  be  held  at  Chicago  on  July  j 
1,  or  just  prior  to  the  day  then  fixed  for  the  j 
convention  of  the  Democratic  party.     This  i 
convention  having  been  postponed  to  Au- , 
gust  29,  the  special  meeting  of  the  Supreme 
Council  was  also  postponed  to  August  27,  i 


at  the  same  place,  and  was  duly  convened 
accordingly.  It  will  be  remembered  that  a 
leading  member  of  the  convention,  in  the 
course  of  a  speech  made  before  that  body, 
alluded  approvingly  to  the  session  of  the 
Sons  of  Liberty  at  Chicago  at  the  same 
time,  as  that  of  an  organization  in  har 
mony  with  the  sentiment  and  projects  of 
the  convention. 

It  may  be  observed,  in  conclusion,  that 
one  not  fully  acquainted  with  the  true 
character  and  intentions  of  the  order,  might 
well  suppose  that,  in  designating  its  officers 
by  high  military  titles,  and  in  imitating  in  its 
organization  that  established  in  our  armies, 
it  was  designed  merely  to  render  itself 
more  popular  and  attractive  with  the 
masses,  and  to  invest  its  chiefs  with  a  cer 
tain  sham  dignity;  but  when  it  is  understood 
that  the  order  comprises  within  itself  a 
large  army  of  well-armed  men,  constantly 
drilled  and  exercised  as  soldiers,  and  that 
this  army  is  held  ready,  at  any  time,  for 
such  forcible  resistance  to  our  military  au 
thorities,  and  such  active  co-operation  with 
the  public  enemy,  as  it  may  be  called  upon 
to  engage  in  by  its  commanders,  it%  will  be 
perceived  that  the  titles  of  the  latter  are 
not  assumed  for  a  mere  purpose  of  dis 
play,  but  that  they  are  the  chiefs  of  an 
actual  and  formidable  force  of  conspirators 
against  the  'life  of  the  Government,  and 
that  their  military  system  is,  as  it  has  been 
remarked  by  Colonel  Sanderson,  "  the 
grand  lever  used  by  the  rebel  government 
for  its  army  operations." 

III. ITS  EXTENT  AND  NUMBERS. 

The  'Hemples"  or  "lodges"  of  the  order 
are  numerously  scattered  through  the 
States  of  Indiana,  Illinois,  Ohio,  Missouri, 
and  Kentucky.  They  are  also  officially  re 
ported  as  established,  to  a  less  extent,  in 
Michigan  and  the  other  Western  States,  as 
well  as  in  New  York,  Pennsylvania,  New 
Hampshire,  Rhode  Island,  Connecticut, 
New  Jersey,  Maryland,  Delaware,  and  Ten 
nessee.  Dodd,  the  Grand  Commander  of 
Indiana,  in  an  address  to  the  members  in 
that  State  of  February,  last,  claims  that  at 
the  next  annual  meeting  of  the  Supreme 
Council  (in  February,  1865,)  every  State  in  the 
Union  will  be  represented,  and  adds,  "this 
is  the  first  and  only  true  national  organiza 
tion  the  Democratic  and  Conservative  men  of 
the  country  have  ever  attempted."  A  pro 
vision  made  in  the  constitution  of  the 
Council  for  a  representation  from  the  Terri 
tories  shows,  indeed,  that  the  widest  exten 
sion  of  the  order  is  contemplated. 

In  the  States  first  mentioned,  the  order 
is  most  strongly  centered  at  the  following 
places,  where  are  situated  its  principal 
"temples."  In  Indiana,  at  Indianapolis 
and  Vincennes ;  in  Illinois,  at  Chicago, 
Springfield  and  Quincy,  (a  large  proportion 
of  the  lodges  in  and  about  the  latter  place 


326 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


having  been  founded  by  the  notorious 
guerrilla  chief,  Jackman;)  in  Ohio,  at  Cin 
cinnati,  Dayton,  and  in  Hamilton  county 
(which  is  proudly  termed  by  members  "the 
South  Carolina  of  the  North;")  in  Missouri, 
at  St.  Louis;  in  Kentucky,  at  Louisville ; 
and  in  Michigan,  at  Detroit,  (whence  com 
munication  was  freely  had  by  the  leaders 
of  the  order  with  Vallandigham  during 
his  banishment,  either  by  letters  addressed 
to  him  through  two  prominent  citizens  and 
members  of  the  order,  or  by  personal  inter 
views  at  Windsor,  C.  W.)  It  is  to  be  added 
that  the  regular  places  of  meeting,  as  also 
the  principal  rendezvous  and  haunts  of  the 
members  in  these  and  less  important  places, 
are  generally  well  known  to  the  Govern 
ment. 

^The  actual  numbers  of  the  order  have,  it 
is  believed,  never  been  officially  reported, 
and  can/ not,  therefore,  be  accurately  ascer 
tained./  Various  estimates  have  been  made, 
by^leading  members,  some  of  which  are  no 
doubt  considerably  exaggerated.  It  has 
been  asserted  by  delegates  to  the  Supreme 
Council  of  February  last,  that  the  number 
was  there  represented  to  be  from  eight 
hundred  thousand  to  one  million;  but  Val 
landigham,  in  his  speech  last  summer  at 
Dayton,  Ohio,  placed  it  at  five  hundred 
thousand,  which  is  probably  much  nearer 
f  the  true  total.  The  number  of  its  mem- 
!  bers  in  the  several  States  has  been  differently 
\estimated  in  the  reports  and  statements  of 
\ts  officers.  Thus,  the  force  of  the  order  in 
Indiana,  is  stated  to  be  from  seventy-five 
\o  one  hundred  and  twenty-five  thousand; 
irV  Illinois,  from  one  hundred  to  one  hun 
dred  and  forty  thousand;  in  Ohio,  from 
eighty  to  one  hundred  and  eight  thousand ; 
in  Kentucky,  from  forty  to  seventy  thou 
sand;  in  Missouri,  from  twenty  to  forty 
thousand;  and  in  Michigan  and  New  York, 
aHput  twenty  thousand  each.  Its  represen 
tation  in  the  other  States  above  mentioned 
does  not  specifically  appear  from  the  testi 
mony  ;  but,  allowing  for  every  exaggera 
tion  in  the  figures  reported,  they  may  be 
deemed  to  present  a  tolerably  faithful  view 
of  what,  at  least,  is  regarded  by  the  or 
der  as  its  true  force  in  the  States  desig 
nated. 

It  is  to  be  noted  that  the  order,  or  its 
counterpart,  is  probably  much  more  widely 
extended  at  the  South  even  than  at  the 
North,  and  that  a  large  proportion  of  the 
officers  of  the  rebel  army  are  represented 
by  credible  witnesses  to  be  members.  In 
Kentucky  and  Missouri  the  order  has  not 
hesitated  to  admit  as  members,  not  only 
officers  of  that  army,  but  also  a  considerable 
number  of  guerrillas,  a  class  who  might  be 
supposed  to  appreciate  most  readily  its 
spirit  and  purposes.  It  is  fully  shown' that 
as  lately  as  in  July  last,  several  of  these 
ruffians  wore  initiated  into  the  first  degree 
by  Dr.  Kalfus,  in  Kentucky. 


IV. ITS    ARMED    FORCE. 

A  review  of  the  testimony  in  regard  to 
the  armed  force  of  the  order,  will  materially 
aid  in  determining  its  real  strength  and 
numbers. 

Although  the  order  has  from  the  outset 
partaken  of  the  military  character,  it  was 
not  till  the  summer  or  fall  of  1863  that  it 
began  to  '  be  generally  organized  as  an 
armed  body.  Since  that  date  its  officers 
and  leaders  have  been  busily  engaged  in 
placing  it  upon  a  military  basis,  and  in  pre 
paring  it  for  a  revolutionary  movement.  A 
general  system  of  drilling  has  been  insti 
tuted  and  secretly  carried  out.  Members 
have  been  instructed  to  be  constantly  pro 
vided  with  weapons,  and  in  some  localities 
it  has  been  absolutely  required  that  each 
member  should  keep  at  his  residence,  at  all 
times,  certain  arms  and  a  specified  quan 
tity  of  ammunition. 

In  March  last,  the  entire  armed  force  of 
the  order,  capable  of  being  mobilized  for  ef 
fective  service,  was  represented  to  be  three 
hundred  and  forty  thousand  men.  As  the  de 
tails,  upon  which  this  statement  was  based, 
are  imperfectly  set  forth  in  the  testimony,  it 
is  not  known  how  far  this  number  may  be 
exaggerated.  It  is  abundantly  shown,  how 
ever,  that  the  order,  by  means  of  a  tax  levied 
upon  its  members,  has  accumulated  consid 
erable  funds  for  the  purchase  of  arms  and 
ammunition,  and  that  these  have  been 
procured  in  large  quantities  for  its  use. 
The  witness  Clarion,  on  the  trial  of  Dodd, 
estilMted  ffiat  two^mtl ifo-of  Ihe—oixLer  are 
furnished  with  arms. 

Green  B.  Smith,  Grand  Secretary  of  the 
order  in  Missouri,  states  in  his  confession 
of  July  last:  "I  know  that  arms,  mostly 
revolvers  and  ammunition,  have  been  pur 
chased  by  members  in  St.  Louis,  to  send 
to  members  in  the  country  wl^ere  they 
could  not  be  had;"  and  he  subsequently 
adds  that  he  himself  alone  clandestinely 
purchased  and  forwarded,  between  April 
15th  and  19th  last,  about  two  hundred  re 
volvers,  with  five  thousand  percussion  caps 
and  other  ammunition.  A  muster-roll  of  one 
of  the  country  lodges  of  that  State  is  exhibi 
ted,  in  wThich,  opposite  the  name  of  each 
member,  are  noted  certain  numbers,  under 
the  heads  of  "Missouri  Republican,"  "St 
Louis  Union,"  "Anzeiger,"  "Miscellaneous 
Periodicals,"  "  Books,"  "Speeches,"  and  '"Re 
ports;"  titles  which,  when  interpreted,  sev 
erally  signify  single-barreled  guns,  double-bar 
reled  guns,  revolvers,  private  ammunition,  private 
lead,  company  powder,  company  lead — the  roll 
thus  actually  setting  forth  the  amount  of 
arms  and  ammunition  in  the  possession  of 
the  lodge  and  its  members.  x. 

In  the  States  oj  Ohio  and  Illinois  the  or-l 
der  is  claimed,  by"  its  members,  to  be  unuj 
sually  well  armed  with  revolvers,  carbines! 
etc.;  but  it  is  in  regard  to  the  arming  of  thf 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


327 


order  in  Indiana  that  the  principal  statis 
tics  have  been  presented,  and  these  may 
serve  to  illustrate  the  system  which  has 

Erobably  been  pursued  in  most  of  the 
tates.  One  intelligent  witness,  who  has 
been  a  member,  estimates  that  in  March 
last,  there  were  in  possession  of  the  order 
in  that  State  six  thousand  muskets  and 
sixty  thousand  revolvers,  besides  private 
arms.  Another  member  testifies  that  at  a 
single  lodge  meeting  of  two  hundred  and 
fifty-two  persons,  which  he  attended  early 
in  the  present  year,  the  sum  of  $4,000  was 
subscribed  for  arms.  Other  members  pre 
sent  statements  in  reference  to  the  number 
of  arms  in  their  respective  counties,  and 
all  agree  in  representing  that  these  have 
been  constantly  forwarded  from  Indianapo 
lis  into  the  interior.  Beck  &  Brothers  are 
designated  as  the  firm  in  that  city,  to 
which  most  of  the  arms  were  consigned. 
These  were  shipped  principally  from  the 
East;  some  packages,  however,  were  sent 
from  Cincinnati,  and  some  from  Kentucky, 
and  the  boxes  were  generally  marked 
''pick-axes,"  "hardware,"  "nails,"  "house 
hold  goods,"  etc. 

General  Carrington  estimates  thaf^in 
February  and  March  last  nearly  thirty 
thousand  guns  and  revolvers  entered  the 
State,  and  this  estimate  is  based  upon  an 
actual  inspection  of  invoices.  The  true  num 
ber  introduced  was,  therefore,  probably  con 
siderably  greater.  That  officer  adds,  that  on 
the  day  in  which  the  sale  of  arms  was 
stopped  by  his  order,  in  Indianapolis,  nearly 
one  thousand  additional  revolvers  had 
been  contracted  for,  and  that  the  trade 
could  not  supply  the  demand.  He  further 
reports  that  after  the  introduction  of  arms 
into  the  Department  of  the  North  had 
been  prohibited  in  General  Orders  of  March 
last,  a  seizure  was  made  by  the  Govern 
ment  of  a  large  quantity  of  revolvers  and 
one  hundred  and  thirty-five  thousand 
rounds  of  ammunition,  which  had  been 
shipped  to  the  firm  in  Indianapolis,  of 
which  H.  H.  Dodd,  Grand  Commander,  was 
a  member;  that  other  arms  about  to  be 
shipped  to  the  same  destination  were  seized 
in  "New  York  city;  and  that  all  these  were 
claimed  as  the  private  property  of  John  C. 
Walker,  one  of  the  Major  Generals  of  the 
order  in  Indiana,  and  were  represented  to 
have  been  " purdiased  for  a  few  friends" 
It  should  also  be  stated  that  at  the  office 
of  Hon.  D.  W.  Voorhees,  M.  C.,  at  Terre 
Haute,  were  discovered  letters  which  dis 
closed  a  correspondence  between  him  and 
ex-Senator  Wall,  of  New  Jersey,  in  regard 
to  the  purchase  of  twenty  thousand  Gari 
baldi  riiies,  to  be  forwarded  to  the  West. 

It  appears  in  the  course  of  the  testimony 
that  a  considerable  quantity  of  arms  and 
ammunition  were  brought  into  the  State  of 
Illinois  from  Burlington,  Iowa,  and  that 
ammunition  was  sent  from  New  Albany. 


Indiana,  into  Kentucky;  it  is  also  repre 
sented  that,  had  Vallandigham  been  ar 
rested  on  his  return  to  Ohio,  it  was  con 
templated  furnishing  the  order  with  arms 
from  a  point  in  Canada,  near  Windsor, 
where  they  were  stored  and  ready  for  use. 

There  remains  further  to  be  noticed,  in 
this  connection,  the  testimony  of  Clayton 
upon  the  trial  of  Dodd.  to  the  effect  that 
arms  were  to  be  furnished  the  order  from 
Nassau.  N.  P.,  by  way  of  Canada;  that,  to 
defray  the  expense  of  these  arms  or  their 
transportation,  a  formal  assessment  was 
levied  upon  the  lodges,  but  that  the  trans 
portation  into  Canada  was  actually  to  be 
furnished  by  the  Confederate  authorities. 

A  statement  was  made  by  Hunt,  Grand 
Commander  of  Missouri,  before  his  arrest, 
to  a  fellow  member,  that  shells  and  all 
kinds  of  munitions  of  war,  as  well  as  infer 
nal  machines,  were  manufactured  for  the 
order  at  Indianapolis;  and  the  late  discov 
ery  in  Cincinnati  of  samples  of  hand-gren 
ades,  conical  shells,  and  rockets,  of  which 
one  thousand  were  about  to  be  manufac 
tured,  under  a  special  contract,  for  the 
Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty,  goes  directly 
to  verify  such  a  statement. 

These  details  will  convey  some  idea  of  the 
attempts  which  have  been  made  to  place 
the  order  upon  a  war  footing  and  prepare  it 
for  aggressive  movements.  But,  notwith 
standing  all  the  efforts  that  have  been  put 
forth,  and  with  considerable  success,  to  arm 
and  equip  its  members  as  fighting  men,  the 
leaders  have  felt  themselves  still  very  defi 
cient  in  their  armament,  and  numerous 
schemes  for  increasing  their  armed  strength 
have  been  devised.  Thus,  at  the  time  of 
the  issuing  of  the  general  order  in  Missouri 
requiring  the  enrollment  of  all  citizens,  it 
was  proposed  in  the  lodges  of  the  Order  of 
American  Knights,  at  St.  Louis,  that  certain 
members  should  raise  companies  in  the 
militia,  in  their  respective  wards,  and  thus 
get  command  of  as  many  Government  arms 
and  equipments  as  possible,  for  the  future 
use  of  the  order.  Again  it  was  proposed 
that  all  the  members  sriQufd^enrol  , them- 
sei v P s  i IT the'trn't'T^rarhrgt^p (I  of  pnying  com 
mutation,  in  this  way  obtaining  possession 
of  United  States  arms,  and  having  the  ad 
vantage  of  the  drill  and  military  instruc 
tion,  "in  the  councils  of  the  order  in  Ken 
tucky,  in  June  last,  a  scheme  was  devised 
for  disarming  all  the  negro  troops,  which  it 
was  thought  could  be  done  without  much 
difficulty,  and  appropriating  their  arms  for 
military  purposes. 

The  despicable  treachery  of  these  pro 
posed  plans,  as  evincing  the  animus  of  the 
conspiracy,  need  not  be  commented  upon. 

It  is  to  be  observed  that  the  order  in  the 
State  of  Missouri  has  counted  greatly  upon 
support  from  the  enrolled  militia,  in  case  of 
an  invasion  by  Price,  as  containing  many 
members  and  friends  of  the  Order  of  Amer- 


328 


TREASON  TRIALS  AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


ican  Knights;  and  that  the  "Paw-Paw 
Militia,"  a  military*  organization  of  Bu 
chanan  county,  as  well  as  the  militia  of 
Platte  and  Clay  counties,  known  as  "  Flat- 
Foots,"  have  been  relied  upon,  almost  to  a 
man,  to  join  the  revolutionary  movement. 

T. — ITS    RITUAL,    OATHS,    AND    INTERIOR     FORMS.  ! 

The  ritual  of  the  order,  as  well  as  its  secret ; 
signs,  passwords,  etc.,  has  been  fully  made 
known  to  the  military  authorities.  "  In  Au-j 
gust  last  one  hundred  and  twelve  copies  of  | 
the  ritual  of  the  Order  of  American  Knights  j 
were  seized  in  the  office  of  Hon.  D.  W.  \ 
Voorhees,  M.  C.,  at  Terre  Haute,  and  a 
large  number  of  rituals  of  the  Order  of  the 
Sons  of  Liberty,  together  with  copies  of  the 
constitutions  of  the  councils,  etc.,  already 
referred  to,  were  found  in  the  building  at 
Indianapolis,  occupied  by  Dodd,  the  Grand 
Commander  of  Indiana,  as  had  been  indi 
cated  by  the  Government  witness  and  de 
tective,  Stidger.  Copies  were  likewise  dis 
covered  at  Louisville,  at  the  residence  of 
Dr.  Kal'fus,  concealed  within  the  mattress 
of  his  bed,  where  Stidger  had  ascertained 
that  they  were  kept. 

The  ritual  of  the  Order  of  American 
Knights  has  also  been  furnished  by  the  au 
thorities  at  St.  Louis.  From  the  ritual,  that 
of  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Liberty  does 
not  materially  differ.  Both  are  termed 
"  progressive,"  in  that  they  provide  for  Jive 
separate  degrees  of  membership,  and  contem 
plate  the  admission  of  a  member  of  a  lower 
degree  into  a  higher  one  only  upon  certain 
vouchers  and  proofs  of  fitness,  which,  with 
each  ascending  degree,  are  required  to  be 
gtronger-and  more  imposing. 

Each  degree  has  its  commander  or  head ; 
the  fourth  or  "grand"  is  the  highest  in  a 
State;  the  fifth  or  "  supreme  "  the  highest 
in  the  United  States;  but  to  the  first  or 
lower  degree  only  do  the  great  majority  of 
members  attain.  A  large  proportion  of 
these  enter  the  order,  supposing  it  to  be  a 
"Democratic"  and  political  association 
merely;  and  the  history  of  the  order  fur 
nishes  a  most  striking  illustration  of  the 
gross  and  criminal  deception  which  may  be 
practiced  upon  the  ignorant  masses  by  un 
scrupulous  and  unprincipled  leaders.  The 
members  of  the  lower  degree  are  often  for  a 
considerable  period  kept  quite  unaware  of 
the  true  purposes  of  their  chiefs.  But  to  the 
latter  they  are  bound,  in  the  language  of 
their  obligation,  "to  yield  prompt  and  implicit 
obedience  to  the  utmost  of  their  ability,  without  re 
monstrance,  hesitation  or  delay"  and  meanwhile 
their  minds,  under  the  discipline  and  teach 
ings  to  which  they  are  subjected,  become 
educated  and  accustomed  to  contemplate 
with  comparative  unconcern  the  treason  for 
which  they  are  preparing. 

The  oaths,  "invocations,''  "charges,"  etc., 
of  the  ritual,  expressed  as  they  are  in  bom 
bastic  and  extravagant  phraseology,  would 


excite  in  the  mind  of  an  educated  person 
only  ridicule  or  contempt,  but  upon  the 
illiterate  they  are  calculated  to  make  a  deep 
impression,  the  effect  and  importance  of 
which  were  doubtless  fully  studied  by  the 
framers  of  the  instrument. 

The  oath  which  is  administered  upon  the 
introduction  of  a  member  into  any  degree, 
is  especially  imposing  in  its  language;  it 
prescribes  as  a  penalty  for  a  violation  of  the 
obligation  assumed  "a  shameful  death,"  and 
further,  that  the  body  of  the  person  guilty 
of  such  violation  shall  be  divided  in  four 
parts  and  cast  out  at  the  four  "gates"  of 
the  temple.  Not  only,  as  has  been  said, 
does  it  enjoin  a  blind  obedience  to  the  com 
mands  of  the  superiors  of  the  order,  but  it 
is  required  to  be  held  of  paramount  obligation 
to  any  oath  which  may  be  administered  to 
a  member  in  a  court  of  justice  or  elsewhere. 
Thus,  in  cases  where  members  have  been 
sworn  by  officers  empowered  to  administer 
oaths  to  speak  the  whole  truth  in  answer  to 
questions  that  may  be  put  to  them,  and 
have  then  been  examined  in  reference  to 
the  order,  and  their  connection  therewith, 
they  have  not  only  refused  to  give  any  in 
formation  in  regard  to  its  character,  but 
have  denied  that  they  were  members,  or 
even  that  they  knew  of  its  existence.  A 
conspicuous  instance  of  this  is  presented  in 
the  cases  of  Hunt,  Dunn,  and  Smith,  the 
chief  officers  of  the  order  in  Missouri,  who, 
upon  their  first  examination  under  oath, 
after  their  arrest,  denied  all  connection 
with  the  order,  but  confessed,  also  under 
oath,  at  a  subsequent  period,  that  this  de 
nial  was  wholly  false,  although  in  accord 
ance  with  their  obligations  as  members. 
Indeed,  a  deliberate  system  of  deception  in 
regard  to  the  details  of  the  conspiracy  is 
inculcated  upon  the  members,  and  stu 
diously  pursued;  and  it  may  be  mentioned, 
as  a  similarly  despicable  feature  of  the  or 
ganization,  that  it  is  held  bound  to  injure 
the  Administration  and  officers  of  the  Gov 
ernment,  in  every  possible  manner,  by'mis- 
representation  and  falsehood. 

Members  are  also  instructed  that  their 
oath  of  membership  is  to  be  held  paramount 
to  an  oath  of  allegiance,  or  any  other  oath 
which  may  impose  obligations  inconsistent 
with  those  which  are  assumed  upon  enter 
ing  the  order.  Thus,  if  a  member,  when  in 
dagger,  or  for  the  purpose  of  facilitating 
some  traitorous  design,  has  taken  the  oath 
of  allegiance  to  the  United  States,  he  is 
held  at  liberty  to  violate  it  on  the  first  occa 
sion,  his  obligation  to  the  order  being 
deemed  superior  to  any  consideration  of 
duty  or  loyalty  prompted  by  such  oath. 

It  is  to  be  added  that  where  members  are 
threatened  with  the  penalties  of  perjury,  in 
case  of  their  answering  falsely  to  questions 
propounded  to  them  in  regard  to  the  order 
before  a  court  or  grand  jury,  they  are  in 
structed  to  refuse  to  answer  such  questions, 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


329 


alleging,  as  a  ground  for  their  refusal,  that  |  Other  signs  are  used  by  members,  and  es- 
their  answers  may  criminate  themselves. ;  pecially  the  officers  of  the  order  in  their 
The  testimony  shows  that  this  course  has  j  correspondence.  Their  letters,  when  of  an 
habitually  been  pursued  by  members,  es- 1  official  character,  are  generally  conveyed  by 
pecially  in  Indiana,  when  placed  in  such  a  j  special  messengers,  but  when  transmitted 
situation.  through  the  mail  are  usually  in  cipher. 

Besides  the  oaths  and  other  forms  and  When  written  in  the  ordinary  manner,  a 
ceremonies  which  have  be.en  alluded  to,  the  J  character  at  the  foot  of  the  letter,  consist- 
ritual  contains  what  are  termed  "  Declara- 1  ing  of  a  circle  with  a  line  drawn  across  the 
tions  of  Principles."  These  declarations, !  center,  signifies  to  the  member  who  receives 
which  are  most  important  as  exhibiting  the  it  that  the  statements  as  written  are  to  be 


creed  and  character  of  the  order,  as  inspired 
by  the  principles  of  the  rebellion,  will  be 
fully  presented  under  the  next  branch  of 
the  subject. 

The  signs,  signals,  passwords,  etc.,  of  the 
order  are  set  forth  at  length  in  the  testi 
mony,  but  need  only  be  briefly  alluded  to. 
It  is  a  significant  fact,  as  showing  the  inti 
mate  relations  between  the  Northern  and 
Southern  sections  of  the  secret  conspiracy, 
that  a  member  from  a  Northern  State  is  en 
abled  to  pass  without  risk  through  the  South 
by  the  use  of  the  signs  of  recognition  which 
have  been  established  throughout  the  order, 
and  by  means  of  which  members  from  dis 
tant  points,  though  meeting  as  strangers, 
are  at  once  made  known  to  each  other  as 
brothers."  Mary  Ann  Pitman  expressly 


understood  in.  a  sense  directly  the  opposite 
to  that  which  would  ordinarily  be  con 
veyed. 

It  is  to  be  added  that  the  meetings  of  the 
order,  especially  in  the  country,  are  gener 
ally  held  at  night  and  in  secluded  places ; 
and  that  the  approach  to  them  is  carefully 
guarded  by  a  line  of  sentinels,  who  are 
passed  only  by  means  of  a  special  counter 
sign,  which  is  termed  the  "picket." 

VI. — ITS   WRITTEN   PRINCIPLES. 

The  " Declaration  of  Principles"  which  is 
set  forth  in  the  ritual  of  the  order,  has 
already  been  alluded  to.  This  declaration, 
which  is  specially  framed  for  the  instruction 
of  the  great  mass  of  members,  commences 
with  the  following  proposition  : 

states  in  her  testimony  that  whenever  im-  j      "  All   men   are  endowed   by  the  Creator 
portant  dispatches  are  required  to  be  sent  {with  certain  rights,  equal  as  far  as  there  is 


by  rebel  generals  beyond  their  lines,  mem 
bers  of  the  order  are  always  selected  to 
convey  them.  Certain  passwords  are  also 
used  in  common  in  both  sections,  and  of 
these,  none  appears  to  be  more  familiar 
than  the  word  "  Nu-ob-lac,"  or  the  name 
"Calhoun"  spelt  backward,  and  which  is 
employed  upon  entering  a  temple  of  the 
first  degree  of  the  Order  of  American 
Knights — certainly  a  fitting  password  to 
such  dens  of  treason. 

Beside  the  signs  of  recognition,  there  are 
signs  of  warning  and  danger,  for  use  at  night, 
as  well  as  by  day ;  as,  for  instance,  signs  to 
warn  members  of  the  approach  of  United 
States  officials  seeking  to  make  arrests. 
The  order  has  also  established  what  are 
called  battle-signals,  by  means  of  which,  as  it 
is  asserted,  a  member  serving  in  the  army 
may  communicate  with  the  enemy  in  the 
field,  and  thus  escape  personal  harm  in 
case  of  attack  or  capture.  The  most  re 
cent  of  these  signals  represented  to  have 
been  adopted  is  a  five-pointed  copper  star, 
worn  under  the  coat,  which  is  to  be  dis 
closed  upon  meeting  an  enemy,  who  will 
thus  recognize  in  the  wearer  a  sympathizer 
and  an  ally.  A  similar  star  of  German  sil 
ver,  hung  in  a  frame,  is  said  to  be  numer 
ously  displayed  by  members  or  their  fami 
lies  in  private  houses  in  Indiana,  for  the  pur 
pose  of  insuring  protection  to  their  property 
in  case  of  a  raid  or  other  attack  ;  and  it  is 
stated  that  in  many  dwellings  in  that  State 
a  portrait  of  John  Morgan  is  exhibited  for 
a  similar  purpose. 


equality  in  the  capacity  for  the  appreciation, 
enjoyment,  and  exercise  of  those  rights." 
And  subsequently  there  is  added :  "  In  the 
Divine  economy  no  individual  of  the  human 
race   must  be  permitted  to  encumber  the 
earth,  to   mar   its  aspects  of  transcendent 
beauty,  nor  to  impede  the  progress  of  the    ffj 
physical   or   intellectual   man,   neither    in     ^T^ 
himself  nor  in  the  race  to  which  he  belongs. 
Hence,  a  people,  upon  whatever  plane  they 
may  be  found  in  the  ascending  scale  of  hu 
manity,  whom  neither  the  divinity  within 
them   nor   the  inspirations  of    divine  and    •3\^ 
beautiful  nature  around  them  can  impel  to 
virtuous   action  and   progress  onward  and 
upward,  should  be  subjected  to  a  just  and 
humane  servitude  and  tutelage  to  the  supe-  ^£* 
rior  race  until  they  shall  be  able  to  appre 
ciate  the  benefits  and  advantages  of  civili 
zation." 

Here,  expressed  in  studied  terms  of  hy 
pocrisy,  is  the  whole  theory  of  human 
bondage — the  right  of  the  strong,  because 
they  are  strong,  to  despoil  and  enslave  the 
weak,  because  they  are  weak!  The  lan 
guages  of  earth  can  add  nothing  to  the 
cowardly  and  loathsome  baseness  of  the 
doctrine,  as  thus  announced.  It  is  the 
Bobber's  creed  sought  to  be  nationalized,  and 
wonM  push  back  the  h.vaJ.  on  ili<-  .i:-:i 
plate  of  our  civilization  to  the  darkest 
periods  of  human  history.  It  must  be  ad 
mitted,  however,  that  it  furnishes  a  fitting 
"corner-stone"  for  the  government  of  a  re 
bellion,  every  fiber  of  whose  body  and  every 
throb  of  whose  soul  is  born  of  the  traitor- 


330 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


ous  ambition  and  slave-pen  inspirations  of 
the  South. 

To  these  detestable  tenets  is  added  that 
other  pernicious  political  theory  of  State  sov 
ereignty,  with  its  necessary  fruit,  the  mon 
strous  doctrine  of  secession — a  doctrine 
which,  in  asserting  that  in  our  federative 
system  a  part  is  greater  than  the  whole, 
would  compel  the  General  Government, 
like  a  Japanese  slave,  to  commit  hari-kari 
whenever  a  faithless  or  insolent  State  should 
command  it  to  do  so. 

Thus,  the  ritual,  after  reciting  that  the 
States  of  the  Union  are  "  free,  independent, 
and  sovereign,"  proceeds  as  follows: 

"  The  government  designated  '  The  Uni 
ted  States  of  America'  has  no  sovereignty,  be 
cause  that  is  an  attribute  with  which  the 
people,,  in  their  several  and  distinct  political 
organizations,  are  endowed,  and  is  inalien 
able.  It  was  constituted  by  the  terms  of 
the  compact,  by  all  the  States,  through  the 
express  will  of  the  people  thereof,  respec 
tively — a  common  agent,  to  use  and  exer 
cise  certain  named,  specified,  defined,  and 
limited  powers  which  are  inherent  of  the 
sovereignties  within  those  States.  It  is  per 
mitted,  so  far  as  regards  its  status  and  re 
lations,  as  common  agent  in  the  exer 
cise  of  the  powers  carefully  and  jealously 
delegated  to  it,  to  call  itself  'supreme,'  but 
not  Sovereign?  In  accordance  with  the 
principles  upon  which  is  founded  the  Amer 
ican  theon/j.  government  can  exercise  only 
delegated  power ;  hence,  if'  those  who  shall 
have  been  chosen  to  administer  the  gov 
ernment  shall  assume  to  exercise  powers 
not  delegated,  they  should  be  regarded  and 
treated  as  -usurpers.  The  reference  to  'in 
herent  power,'  'war  power,'  or  'military 
necessity,'  on  the  part  of  the  functionary 
for  the  sanction  of  an  arbitrary  exercise  of 
power  by  him,  we  will  not  accept  in  pallia 
tion  or  excuse." 

To  this  is  added,  as  a  corollary,  "  it  is  in 
compatible  with  the  history  and  nature  of 
our  system  of  government,  that  Federal 
authority  should  coerce  by  arms  a  sovereign 
State." 

The  declaration  of  principles,  however, 
does  not  stop  here,  but  proceeds  one  step 
further,  as  follows : 

''  Whenever  the  chosen  officers  or  dele 
gates  shall  fail  or  refuse  to  administer  the 
Government  in  strict  accordance  with  the 
letter  of  the  accepted  Constitution,  it  is  the 
inherent  right  and  the  solemn  and  impera 
tive  duty  of  the  people  to  resist  the  func 
tionaries,  and,  if  need  be,  to  expel  them  by 
force  of  arms !  Such  resistance  is  not  revolu 
tion,  but  is  solely  the  assertion  of  right — the 
exercise  of  all  the  noble  attributes  which 
impart  honor  and  dignity  to  manhood." 

To  the  same  effect,  though  in  a  milder 
tone,  is  the  platform  of  the  order  in  Indi 
ana,  put  forth  by  the  Grand  Council  at 


clares  that  "the  right  to  alter  or  abolish 
their  government,  whenever  it  fails  to  se- 
;ure  the  blessings  of  liberty,  is  one  of  the 
inalienable  rights  of  the  people  that  can 
never  be  surrendered." 

Such,  then,  are  the  principles  which  the 
new  member  swears  to  observe  and  abide 
by  in  his  obligation,  set  forth  in  the  ritual, 
where  he  says:  "1  do  solemnly  promise  that 
I  will  ever  cherish  in  my  heart  of  hearts 
the  sublime  creed  of  the  E.  K.,  (Excellent 
Knights,)  and  will,  so  far  as  in  me  lies, 
illustrate  the  same  in  my  intercourse  with 
men,  and  will  defend  the  principles  thereof, 
if  need  be,  with  my  life,  whensoever  as 
sailed,  in  my  own  country  first  of  all.  I  do 
further  solemnly  declare  that  I  will  never 
take  up  arms  in  behalf  of  any  government 
which  does  not  acknowledge  the  sole  au 
thority  or  power  to  be  the  will  of  the  gov 
erned." 

The  following  extracts  from  the  ritual, 
may  also  be  quoted  as  illustrating  the  prin 
ciple  of  the  right  of  revolution  and  resist 
ance  to  constituted  authority  insisted  upon 
by  the  order: 

'Our  swords  shall  be  unsheathed  when 
ever  the  great  principles  which  we  aim  to 
inculcate  and  have  sworn  to  maintain  and 
defend  are  assailed." 

Again :  "  I  do  solemnly  promise,  that  when 
soever  the 
culcates  shal 
country,  I  will  defend  these  principles  with 
my  sword  and  my  life,  in  whatsoever  capa 
city  may  be  assigned  me  by  the  competent 
authority  of  our  order." 

And  further:  "I  do  promise  that  I  will, 
at  all  times,  if  need  be,  take  up  arms  in  the 
cause  of  the  oppressed — in  my  own  coun 
try  first  of  all — against  any  power  or  gov 
ernment  usurped,  which  may  be  found  in 
arms  and  waging  war  against  the  people  or 
peoples  who  are  endeavoring  to  establish, 
or  have  inaugurated,  a  government  for 
themselves  of  their  own  free  choice." 

Moreover,  it  is  to  be  noted  that  all  the 
addresses  and  speeches  of  its  leaders 
breathe  the  same  principle,  of  the  right  of 
the  forcible  resistance  to  the  Government, 
as  one  of  the  tenets  of  the  order. 

Thus  P.  C.  Wright,  Supreme  Commander, 
in  his  general  address  of  December,  1863, 
after  urging  that  "  the  spirit  of  the  fathers 
may  animate  the  free  minds,  the  brave 
hearts,  and  still  unshackled  limbs  of  the 
true  democracy"  -(meaning  the  members  of 
the  order,)  adds  as  follows :  "To  be  prepared 
for  the  crisis  now  approaching,  we  must 
catch  from  afar  the  earliest  and  faintest 
breathings  of  the  spirit  of  the  storm; 
to  be  successful  when  the  storm  comes,  we 
must  be  watchful,  patient,  brave,  confident, 
organized,  armed." 

Thus,  too,  Dodd,  Grand  Commander  of 


principles  which  our  order  in- 
ill  be  assailed  in  mv  own  State  or 


the  order  in  Indiana,  quoting,   in 


ad- 


their  meeting  in  February  last,  which  de- 1  dress   of  February  last,   the  views  of  his 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


331 


chief,  ValTandigham,  and  adopting  them 
as  his  own,  says: 

"He  (Vallandigham)  judges  that  the 
Washington  power  will  not  yield  up  its 
power  until  it  is  taken  from  them  by  an  in 
dignant  people  by  force  of  arms." 

Such,  then,  are  the  written  principles 
of  the  order  in  which  the  neophyte  is  in 
structed,  and  which  he  is  sworn  to  cherish 
and  observe  as  his  rule  of  action,  when, 
with  arms  placed  in  his  hands,  he  is  called 
upon  to  engage  in  the  overthrow  of  his 
Government.  This  declaration — first,  of  the 
absolute  ought  of  slavery;  second,  of  State 
sovereignty  and  the  right  of  secession ;  third, 
of  the  right  of  armed  resistance  to  consti 
tuted  authority  on  the  part  of  the  dis 
affected  and  the  disloyal,  whenever  their 
ambition  may  prompt  them  to  revolu 
tion — is  but  an  assertion  of  that  abomin 
able  theory  which,  from  its  first  enuncia 
tion,  served  as  a  pretext  for  conspiracy 
after  conspiracy  against  the  Government 
on  the  part  of  Southern  traitors,  until  their 
detestable  plotting  culminated  in.  open  re 
bellion  and  bloody  civil  war.  What  more 
appropriate  password,  therefore,  to  be  com 
municated  to  the  new  member  upon  his  first 
admission  to  the  secrets  of  the  order  could 
have  been  conceived,  than  that  which  was 
actually  adopted — "Calhoun! " — a  man  who, 
baffled  in  his  lust  for  power,  with  gnashing 
teeth  turned  upon  the  Government  that 
had  lifted  him  to  its  highest  honors,  and 
upon  the  country  that  had  borne  him,  and 
down  to  the  very  close  of  his  fevered  life 
labored  incessantly  to  scatter  far  and  wide 
the  seeds  of  that  poison  of  death  now  upon 
our  lips.  The  thorns  which  now  pierce 
and  tear  us  are  of  the  tree  he  planted. 

VII. ITS    SPECIFIC    PURPOSES    AND    OPERATIONS. 

From  the  principles  of  the  order,  as  thus 
set  forth,  its  general  purpose  of  co-operating 
with  the  rebellion  may  readily  be  inferred, 
and,  in  fact,  those  principles  could  logic 
ally  lead  to  no  other  result.  This  general 
purpose,  indeed,  is  distinctly  set  forth  in 
the  personal  statements  and  confessions  of 
its  members,  and  particularly  of  its  prom 
inent  officers,  who  have  been  induced  to 
make  ^disclosures  to  the  Government. 
Among*  the  most  significant  of  these  con 
fessions  are  those  already  alluded  to,  of 
Hunt,  Dunn,  and  Smith,  the  heads  of  the 
order  in  Missouri.  The  latter,  whose  state 
ment  is  full  and  explicit,  says:  "At  the 
time  I  joined  the  order  I  understood  that 
its  object  was  to  aid  and  assist  the  Confed 
erate  Government,  and  endeavor  to  restore 
the  Union  as  it  was  prior  to  this  rebellion." 
He  adds:  "The  order  is  hostile  in  every  re- 
epect  to  the  General  Government,  and 
friendly  to  the  so-called  Confederate  Gov 
ernment.  It  is  exclusively  made  up  of  dis 
loyal  persons — of  all  Democrats  who  are 
desirous  of  securing  the  independence  of 


the  Confederate  States  with  a  view  of  re 
storing  the  Union  as  it  was." 

It  would  be  idle  to  comment  on  such 
gibberish  as  the  statement  that  "  the  inde 
pendence  of  the  Confederate  States"  was  to 
be  used  as  the  means  of  restoring  "  the 
Union  as  it  was;"  and  yet,  under  the  man 
ipulations  of  these  traitorous  jugglers,  doubt 
less  the  brains  of  many  have  been  so  far 
muddled  as  to  accept  this  shameless  de 
claration  as  true. 

But  proceeding  to  the  specific  purposes  of 
the  order,  which  its  leaders  have  had  in 
view  from  the  beginning,  and  which,  as 
will  be  seen,  it  has  been  able,  in  many  cases, 
to  carry  out  with  very  considerable  success, 
the  following  are  found  to  be  the  most 
pointedly  presented  by  the  testimony : 

1.  Aiding  Soldiers  to  Desert  and  Harboring  and 
Protecting  Deserters. — Early  in  its  history  the 
order  essayed  to  undermine  such  portions 
of  the  army  as  were  exposed  to  its  in 
sidious  approaches.  Agejjts^w.ere.  sent  by 
the  Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle  into,  the 
camps  to  introduce  the  order  among  the 
soldiers,  and  those  who  became  members 
weFe"mslructed  to  induce  as  many  of  their 
companions  as  possible"  to  desert,  and  for 
this-  purpose  the  latter  were  furnished  by 
the  order  with  money  and  citizens'  clothing. 
Soldiers  who  hesitated  at  desertiqn,  but  de 
sired  to  leave  the  army,  were  introduced 
to  lawyers  who  engaged  'to  furnish  them 
some  quasi  legal  pretext  for  so  doing,  and  a 
certain  attorney  of  Indianapolis,  named 
Walpole,  who  was  particularly  conspicuous 
in  furnishing  facilities  of  this  character  to 
soldiers  who  applied  to  him,  has  boasted 
that  he  has  thus  aided  five  hundred  en 
listed  men  to  escape  from  their  contracts. 
Through  the  schemes  of  the  order  in  In 
diana  whole  companies  were  broken  up — 
a  large  detachment  of  a  battery  company, 
for  instance,  deserting  on  one  occasion  to 
the  enemy  with  two  of  its  guns — and  the 
camps  were  imbued  with  a  spirit  of  discon 
tent  and  dissatisfaction  with  the  service; 
Some  estimate  of  the  success  of  these 
efforts  may  be  derived  from  a  report  of  the 
Adjutant  General  of  Indiana,  of  January, 
in  1863,  setting  forth  that  the  number  of 
deserters  and  absentees  returned  to  the 
army  through  the  post  of  Indianapolis 
alone,  during  the  month  of  December,. 
1862,  was  nearly  two  thousand  six-  IIUH'- 
dred. 

As  soon  as  arrests  of  these  deserters  be 
gan  to  be  generally  made,  writs  of  habeas 
corpus  were  issued  in  their  cases  by  disloyal 
judges,  and  a  considerable  number  were  dis 
charged  thereon.  In  one  instance  in  Indi 
ana,  where  an  officer  in  charge  of  a  deserter 
properly  refused  to  obey  the  writ,  after  it 
had  been  suspended  in  such  cases  by  the 
President,  his  attachment  for  contempt 
was  ordered  by  the  Chief  Justice  of  the 
State,  who  declared  that  "the  streets  of 


332 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


Indianapolis  might  run  with  blood,  but  that 
he  would  enforce  his  authority  against  the 
President's  order."  On  another  occasion 
certain  United  States  officers  who  had 
made  the  arrest  of  deserters  in  Illinois 
were  themselves  arrested  for  kidnapping, 
and  held  to  trial  by  a  disloyal  judge,  who 
at  the  same  time  discharged  the  deserters, 
tlymgh  acknowledging  them  to  be  such. 
/Soldiers  upon  deserting,  were  assured  of 
mimunity  from  punishment  and  protection 
on  the  part  of  the  order,  and  were  instruc 


ted  to  bring  away  with  them/their  arms, 
and,  if  mounted,  their  horses.//  Details  sent 
to  arrest  them  by  the  military  authorities, 
were  in  several  cases  forcibly  resisted,  and, 
where  not  unusually  strong  in  numbers, 
were  driven  back  by  large  bodies  of  men, 
subsequently  generally  ascertained  to  be 
members  of  the  order.  Where  arrests 
were  effected,  our  troops  were  openly  at 
tacked  and  fired  upon  on  their  return. 
Instances  of  such  attacks  occurring  in  Mor 
gan  and  Rush  counties,  Indiana,  are  espe 
cially  noticed  by  General  Carrington.  In 
the  case  of  the  outbreak  in  Morgan  county, 
J.  S.  Bingham,  editor  of  the  Indianapolis 
Sentinel,  a  member  or  friend  of  the  order, 
sought  to  forward  to  the  disloyal  newspa 
pers  of  the  West  false  and  inflammatory 
telegraphic  dispatches  in  regard  to  the 
affair,  to  the  effect  that  cavalry  had  been 
sent  to  arrest  all  the  Democrats  in  the 
county,  that  they  had  committed  gross 
outrages,  and  that  several  citizens  had 
been  shot;  and  adding  "ten  thousand  sol 
diers  can  not  hold  the  men  arrested  this 
night.  Civil  war  and  bloodshed  are  inev 
itable."  The  assertions  in  this  dispatch 
were  entirely  false,  and  may  serve  to  illus 
trate  the  fact  heretofore  noted,  that  a  stu 
dious  misrepresentation  of  the  acts  of  the 
Government  and  its  officers  is  a  part  of  the 
prescribed  duty  of  the  members  of  the 
order.  It  is  proper  to  mention  that  seven 
of  the  party  in  Morgan  county,  who  made 
the  attack  upon  our  troops,  were  convicted 
of  their  offense  by  a  State  court.  Upon 
their  trial  it  was  proved  that  the  party  was 
composed  of  members  of  the  Knights  of 
the  Golden  Circle. 

One  of  the  most  pointed  instances  of  pro 
tection  afforded  to  deserters  occurred  in  a 
case  in  Indiana,  where  seventeen  intrenched 
themselves  in  a  log  cabin  with  a  ditch  and 
palisade,  and  were  furnished  with  provisions 
and  sustained  in  their  defense  against  our 
military  authorities  for  a  considerable  pe 
riod  by  the  order  or  its  friends. 

2.  Discouraging  Enlistments  and  Resisting  the 
Draft. — It  is  especially  inculcated  by  the 
order  to  oppose  the  re-enforcement  of  our 
armies,  either  by  volunteers  or  drafted  men. 
In  1862  the  Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle 
organized  generally  to  resist  the  draft  in  the 
Western  States,  and  were  strong  enough  in 
certain  localities  to  greatly  embarrass  the 


Government.  In  this  year  and  early  in 
1863  a  number  of  enrolling  officers  were 
shot  in  Indiana  and  Illinois.  In  Blackford 
county,  Indiana,  an  attack  was  made  upon 
the  court-house,  and  the  books  connected 
with  the  draft  were  destroyed.  In  several 
counties  of  the  State  a  considerable  mili 
tary  force  was  required  for  the  protection 
of  the  United  States  officials,  and  a  large 
number  of  arrests  were  made,  including 
that  of  one  Reynolds,  an  ex-Senator  of  the 
Legislature,  for  publicly  urging  upon  the 
populace  to  resist  the  conscription — an  of 
fense  of  the  same  character,  in  fact,  as  that 
upon  which  Yallandigham  was  apprehended 
in  Ohio.  These  outbreaks  were  no  doubt, 
in  most  cases,  incited  by  the  order  and  en 
gaged  in  by  its  members.  In  Indiana 
nearly  two  hundred  persons  were  indicted 
for  conspiracy  against  the  Government,  re 
sisting  the  draft,  etc.,  and  about  sixty  of 
these  were  convicted. 

Where  members  of  the  order  were  forced 
into  the  army  by  the  draft,  they  were  in 
structed,  in  case  they  were  prevented  from 
presently  escaping,  and  were  obliged  to  go 
to  the  field,  to  use  their  arms  against  their 
fellow-soldiers  rather  than  the  enemy,  or,  if 
possible,  to  desert  to  the  enemy,  by  whom, 
through  the  signs  of  the  order,  they  would 
be  recognized  and  received  as  friends. 
Whenever""  a  member  volunteered  in  the 
army  he  was  at  once  expelled  from  the 
order. 

3.  Circulation    of   Disloyal    and   Treasonable 
Publications. — The  order,  especially  in  Mis 
souri,  has  secretly  circulated  throughout  the 
country   a   great    quantity   of    treasonable 
publications,   as  a  means  of  extending  its" 
own  power  and  influence,  as  well  as  of  giv 
ing  encouragement  to  the  disloyal  and  in 
citing  them  to  treason. /'Of  these,  some  of 
the    principal   are  the   following:  Pollards 
Southern  History  of  the  War,  Official  Reports  of 
the    Confederate   Government,  Life  of  Stonewall 
Jackson,  pamphlets  containing  articles  from 
the  Metropolitan  Record,  Abraham  Africanus,  or 
Mysteries  of  the  White  House,  The  Lincoln  Cat 
echism,  or -a  Guide  to  the  Presidential  Election  of 
1864,  Indestructible  Organics,  by  Tirga.     These 
publications  have  generally  been  procured 
by  formal    requisitions    drawn    upon    the 
grand  commander  by  leading  members  in 
the  interior  of  a  State. /One  of  these  re 
quisitions,  dated  June  lOfh  last,  and  drawn 
by  a  local  secretary  of  the  order  at  Gentry- 
ville,  Missouri,   is   exhibited  in   the    testi 
mony.     It  contains  a  column  of  the  initials 
of   subscribers,  opposite  whose  names   are 
entered  the  number  of  disloyal  publications 
to   be   furnished,    the   particular   book    or 
books,    etc.,   required   being  indicated    by 
fictitious  titles. 

4.  Communicating  u'ith,  and  Giving  Intelligence 
to,  Me  Enemy.f-Smith,  Grand  Secretary  of 
fbe  order  in  Missouri,  says,  in  his  confes 
sion  :  "  Rebel  spies,  mail-carriers,  and  emis- 


TREASON    TRIALS   AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


333 


saries  have  been  carefully  protected  by  this 
order  ever  since  I  have  been  a  member. \ 
It  is  shown  in  the  testimony  to  be  custo 
mary  in  the  r^bel  service,  to  employ  mem 
hereof  the  order  MS  spi^s,  under  the  u'uisi 
of~s6Tdie*.  furnished  wifn*  furloughs  to  visii 
their  homes  within  our  lines.  On  coming 
within  the  territory  occupied  by  our  forces, 
they  are  harbored  and  supplied  with  infor 
mation  by  the  order.  Another  class  ofjjpje> 
..claim  to  be  deserters  from  th^  q»pmyT  and 
at  once  seeTc  an  opportunity  to  take  the 
oath  of  allegiance,  which,  however,  though 
voluntarily  taken,  they  claim  to  be  admin 
istered  while  they  are  under  a  species  of 
duress,  and,  therefore,  not  to  be  binding. 
Upon  sweari|ig._allesl!OL^c^  to  the  Govern 
ment,,  the  pretended  deserter  engages,  with 
the  assistance  of  the  order,  in  collecting 
contraHan3~g6b"ds  or  procuring  intelligence 
to  be  conveyed  to  the  enemy,  or  in  some 
other  treasonable  enterprise.  In  his  official 
report  of  June  12th  last,  Colonel  Sanderson 
remarks:  "This  department  is  filled  with 
rebel  spies,  all  of  whom  belong  to  the 
order." 

In  Missouri  regular  mail  communication 
was  for  a  long  period  maintained  through 
the  agency  of  the  order  from  St.  Louis  to 
Price's  army,  by  means  of  which  private 
letters,  as  well  as  official  dispatches  between 
him  and  the  Grand  Commander  of  Missouri, 
were  regularly  transmitted.  The  mail- 
carriers  started  from  a  point  on  the  Pacific 
railroad,  near  Kirkwood  station,  about  four 
teen  miles  from  St.  Louis,  and,  traveling 
only  by  night,  proceeded  (to  quote  from 
Colonel  Sanderson's  report)  to  "  Mattox 
Mills,  on  the  Maramee  river,  thence  past 
Mineral  Point  to  Webster,  thence  to  a  point 
fifteen  miles  below  Van  Buren,  where  they 
crossed  the  Black  river,  and  thence  to  the 
rebel  lines."  It  is,  probably,  also  by  this 
route  that  the  secret  correspondence,  stated 
by  the  witness  Pitman  to  have  been  con 
stantly  kept  up  between  Price  and  Vallan- 
digham,  the  heads  of  the  order  at  the 
North  and  South,  respectively,  was  success 
fully  maintained. 

A  similar  communication  has  been  con 
tinuously  held  with  the  enemy  from  Louis 
ville,  Kentucky.  A  considerable  number 
of  women  in  that  State,  many  of  them  of 
high  position  in  rebel  society,  and  some  of 
them  outwardly  professing  to  be  loyal,  were 
discovered  to  have  been  actively  engaged  in 
receiving  and  forwarding  mails,  with  the  as- 
gistance  of  the  order  and  as  its  instruments. 
Two  of  the  most  notorious  and  successful 
of  these,  Mrs.  Woods  and  Miss  Cassell,  have 
been  apprehended  and  imprisoned. 

By  means  of  this  correspondence  with 
the  enemy,  the  members  of  the  order  were 
promptly  apprised  of  all  raids  to  be  made 
by  the  forces  of  the  former,  and  were  able 
to  hold  themselves  prepared  to  render  aid 
and  comfort  to  the  raiders.  To  show  how 


efficient  for  this  purpose  was  the  system 
Thus  established,  it  is  to  be  added  that  our 
military  authorities  have,  in  a  number  of 
cases,  been  informed,  through  members  of 
the  order  employed  in  the  interest  of  the 
Government,  of  impending  raids  and  im 
portant  army  movements  of  the  rebels,  not 
only  days,  but  sometimes  weeks,  sooner 
than  the  same  intelligence  could  have 
reached  them  through  the  ordinary  chan 
nels. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  system  of  espion 
age  kept  up  by  the  order,  for  the  purpose  of 
obtaining  information  of  the  movements  of 
our  own  forces,  etc.,  to  be  imparted  to  the 
enemy,  seems  to  have  been  as  perfect  as  it 
was  secret.  The  Grand  Secretary  of  the 
order  in  Missouri  states,  in  his  confession: 
"One  of  the  especial  objects  of  this  order 
was  to  place  members  in  steamboats,  ferry 
boats,  telegraph  offices,  express  offices,  de 
partment  headquarters,  provost  marshal's 
office,  and,  in  fact,  in  every  position  where 
they  could  do  valuable  service;"  and  he 
proceeds  to  specify  certain  members  who, 
at  the  date  of  his  confession,  (August  2d 
last,)  were  employed  at  the  express  and 
telegraph  offices  in  St.  Louis. 

5.  Aiding  the  Enemy,  by  Recruiting  for  them,  or 
assisting  them  to  Recruit,  within  our  lines. — This 
has  also  been  extensively  carried  on  by 
members  of  the  order,  particularly  in  Ken 
tucky  and  Missouri.  It  is  estimated  that 
two  thousand  men  were  sent  South  from 
Louisville  alone  during  a-  few  we^kia...  in 
April  and  May,  1864.  The  order  and  its 
friends  at  that  city  have  a  perrnajnLent  fund, 
to  which  there  are  many  subscribers,  for  the 
purpose  of  fitting  out  with  pistols,  clothing, 
money,  etc.,  men  desiring  to  join  the  South 
ern  service;  and,  in  the  lodges  of  the  order 
n  S't.  Louis  and  Northern  Missouri,  nionejr 
lias  often  been  raised  to  purchase  horses, 
arms,  and  equipments  for  soldiers  about  to 
t>e  forwarded  to  the  Southern  army.  In 
the  latter  State,  parties  empowered  by 
Price,  or  by  Grand  Commander  Hunt  as 
lis  representative,  to  recruit  for  the  rebel 
service,  were  nominally  authorized  to  "locate 
lands"  as  it  was  expressed,  and  in  their  re 
ports,  which  were  formally  made,  the  num- 
:>er  of  acres,  etc.,  located  represented  the 
lumber  of  men  recruited.  At  Louisville. 
:hose  desiring  to  join  the  Southern  forces 
vere  kept  hidden,  and  supplied  with  food 
ind  lodging  until  a  convenient  occasion  was 
)resented  for  their  transportation  South. 
They  were  then  collected,  and  conducted  at 
night  to  a  safe  rendezvous  of  the  order, 
hence  they  were  forwarded  to  their  desti- 
lation,  in  some  cases  stealing  horses  from 
he  United  States  corrals  on  their  way. 
>Vhile  'awaiting  an  occasion  to  be  sent 
South,  the  men,  to  avoid  the  suspicion 
vhich  might  be  excited  by  their  being  seen 
ogether  in  any  considerable  number,  were 
often  employed  on  farms  in  the  vicinity  of 


334 


TREASON   TRIALS    AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


Louisville,  and  the  farm  of  one  Grant  in  |  forward  their  goods  as  if  for  ordinary  pur- 
that  neighborhood,  (at  whose  house,  also,  !  poses  of  trade,  to  a  certain  point  near  the 
meetings  of  the  order  were  held,)  is  indi-  rebel  lines,  where,  by  the  connivance  of  the 
cated  in  the  testimony  as  one  of  the  locali- 'owners,  the  enemy  would  be  enabled  to 
ties  where  such  recruits  were  rendezvoused  |  seize  them. 


and  employed.  7.    Op-operating  with  the  .Enemy  in  Raids  and 

The  same  facilities  which  were  afforded  I  Invasions. — While  it  is  clear  that  the  order 
to  recruits  for  the  Southern  army  were  also  has  given  aid,  both  directly  and  indirectly, 
furnished  by  the  order  to  persons  desiring  to  the  forces  of  the  rebels,  and  to  guerrilla 
to  proceed  beyond  our  lines  for  any  illegal 


purpose.  By  these  Louisville  was  generally 
preferred  as  a  point  of  departure,  and,  on 
the  Mississippi  river,  a  particular  steamer, 
the  Graham,  was  selected  as  the  safest  con 
veyance. 

6.  Furnishing  the  rebels  with  Arms,  Ammuni 
tion;  etc. — In  this,  too,  the  order,  and' espe 
cially  its  female  members  and  allies,  has 


bands,  when  engaged  in  making  incursions 
into  the  border  States,  yet  because,  on  the 
one  hand,  of  the  constant  restraint  upon 
its  action  exercised  by  our  military  author 
ities,  and,  on  the  other,  of  the  general  suc 
cess  of  our  armies  in  the  field  over  those  of 
the  enemy,  their  allies  at  the  North  have 
never  thus  far  been  able  to  carry  out  their 
grand  plan  of  a  general  armed  rising  of  the 


been    sedulously    engaged.     The    rebel  wo-  order,  and  its  co-operation,  on  an  extended 
men  of  Louisville  and  Kentucky  HT^epre'-  scale  with  the  Southern  forces.     This  plan 


sented  as  having  rendered  the  most  valuable 
aid  to  the  Southern  army,  by  transporting 
large  quantities  of  percussion  caps,  powder, 
etc.,  concealed  upon  their  persons,  to  some 
convenient  locality  near  the  lines,  whence 
they  could  be  readily  conveyed  to  those  for 
whom  they  were  intended.  It  is  estimated 
that  at  Louisville,  up  to  May  1st  lastr-fch~e 
sum  of  $17,000  had  been  invested  by  the 
order  in  ammunition  and  arms,  to  be,  for 
warded  principally  in  this  manner  to  the 
rebels.  In  St.  Louis  several  iirniSj_ who  are 
well  known  to  the  Government,  the  princi 
pal  of  which  is  Beauvais  &  Co.,  liaye  been 
engaged  in  supplying  arms  and  ammunition 
to'members  of  the  order,  to  be  conveyed  to 
their  Southern  allies.  Mary  Ann  Pitman,  a 
reliable  witness,  and  a  member  of  the  Order 
of  American  Knights,  who  will  hereafter  be 
specially  alluded  to,  states  in  her  testimony 
that  she  visited  Beauvais  &  Co.  three  times, 
and  procured  from  them  ^on  each  occasion 
about  $80  worth  of  caps,  besides  a  number 
of  pistols  and  cartridges,  which  she  carried 
in  person  to  Forrest's  command,  as  well  as 
a  much  larger  quantity  of  similar  articles 
which  she  caused  to  be  forwarded  by  other 
agents.  The  guerrillas  in  Missouri  also  re 
ceive  arms  from  St.  Louis,  and  one  Douglas, 
one  of  the  most  active  conspirators  of  the 
Order  of  American  Knights  in  Missouri, 
and  a  special  emissary  of  Price,  was  arrested 


has  been  twofold,  and  consisted,  first,  of 
ri^ing-of-tke -canier  in  Missouri,  aided  by  a 
strong  detachment  from  Illinois,  and  a  co 
operation  with  a  rebel  army  under  Price; 
second,  of  a  similar  rising  in  Indiana,  Ohio, 
and  Kentucky,  and  a  co-operation  with  a 
force  under  Breckinridge,  Buckner,  Morgan, 
or  some  other  rebel  commander,  who  was 
to  invade  the  latter  State.  In  this  case  the 
order  was  first  to  cut  the  railroads  and  tele 
graph  wires,  so  that  intelligence  of  the 
movement  might  not  be  sent  abroad  and 
the  transportation  of  Federal  troops  might 
be  delayed,  and  then  to  seize  upon  the  ar 
senals  at  Indianapolis,  Columbus,  Springfield, 
Louisville,  and  Frankfort,  and,  furnishing 
such  of  their  number  as  were  without  arms, 
to  kill  or  make  prisoners  of  department, 
district,  and  post  commanders,  release  the 
rebel  prisoners  at  Bock  Island,  and  at 
Camps  Morton,  Douglas,  and  Chase,  and 
thereupon  join  the  Southern  army  at  Louis 
ville  or  some  other  point  in  Kentucky, 
which  State  was  to  be  permanently  occu 
pied  by  the  combined  force.  At  the  period 
of  the  movement  it  was  also  proposed  that 
an  attack  should  be  made  upon  Chicago  by 
means-  of  steam-tugs  mounted  with  cannon. 
A  similar  course  was  to  be  taken  in  Mis 
souri,  and  was  to  result  in  the  permanent 
occupation  of  that  State. 

This  scheme  has  long  occupied  the  minds 


while  in  the  act  of  transporting  a  box  of   of  members  of  the  order,  and  has  been  con- 


forty  revolvers  by  railroad  to  a  guerrilla 
camp  in  the  interior  of  the  State.  Medical 
stores  in  large  quantities  were  likewise,  by 
the  aid  of  the  order,  furnished  to  the  en 
emy,  and  a  "young  doctor"  named  Moore, 
said  to  be  now  a  medical  inspector  in  the 
rebel  army,  is  mentioned  as  having  u  made 
$75.000  by  smuggling  medicines " — princi 
pally  from  Louisville — through  the  lines  of 
our  army.  Supplies  were,  in  som#  cases, 
conveyed  to  the  enemy  through  the  me- 


tinually  discussed  by  them  in  their  lodges. 
A  rising,  somewhat  of  the  character  de 
scribed,  was  intended  to  have  taken  place 
in  the  spring  of  this  year,  simultaneously 
with  an  expected  advance  of  the  army  of 


Lee  upon  Washington ;  but  the  plans  of  the 
enemy  having  been  anticipated  by  the  move 
ments  of  our  own  generals,  the  rising  of  the 
conspirators  was  necessarily  postponed. 
Again,  a  general  movement  of  the  Southern 
forces  was  expected  to  occur  about  July  4, 


dium  of  professed  loyalists,  who,  having  re-  j  and  with  this  the  order  was  to  co-operate, 
ceived  permits  for  that  purpose  from  the  j  A  speech  to  be  made  by  Vallandigham  at 
United  States  military  authorities,  would  i  the  Chicago  Convention  was,  it  is  said,  to  be 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


335 


the  signal  for  the  rising ;  but  the  postpone 
ment  of  the  convention,  as  well  as  the  fail 
ure  of  the  rebel  armies  to  engage  in  the  an 
ticipated  movement,  again  operated  to  dis 
turb  the  programme  of  the  order.  During 
the  summer,  however,  the  grand  plan  of  ac 
tion  above  set  forth  has  been  more  than 
ever  discussed  throughout  the  order,  and 
its  success  most  confidently  predicted,  while, 
at  the  same  time,  an  extensive  organization 
and  preparation  for  carrying  the  conspiracy 
into  effect  have  been  actively  going  on. 
But,  up  to  this  time,  notwithstanding  the 
late  raids  of  the  enemy  in  Kentucky,  and 
the  invasion  of  Missouri  by  Price,  no  such 
general  action  on  the  part  of  the  order  as 
was  contemplated  has  taken  place — a  result, 
in  great  part,  owing  to  the  activity  of  our 
military  authorities  in  strengthening  the 
detachments  at  the  prisons,  arsenals,  etc., 
and  in  causing  the  arrest  of  the  leading 
conspirators  in  the  several  States,  and  espe 
cially  in  the  seizure,  of  large  quantities  of 
arms  which  had  been  shipped  for  the  use  of 
the  order  in  their  intended  outbreak.  It 
was  doubtless  on  account  of  these  precau 
tions  that  the  day  last  appointed  for  the 
rising  of  the  order  in  Indiana  and  Ken 
tucky  (August  16)  passed  by  with  but  slight 
disorder. 

It  is,  however,  the  inability  of  the  public 
enemy,  in  the  now  declining  days  of  the 
rebellion,  to  initiate  the  desired  increment 
which  has  prevented  the  order  from  engag 
ing  in  open  warfare;  and  it  has  lately  been 
seriously  considered  in  their  councils  wheth 
er  they  should  not  proceed  with  their  re 
volt,  relying  alone  upon  the  guerrilla  bands 
of  Syphert,  Jesse  and  others,  for  support 
and  assistance. 

With  these  guerrillas  the  order  has  always 
most  readily  acted  along  the  border,  and  in 
cases  of  capture  by  the  Union  forces  of 
Northern  members  of  the  order  engaged  in 
co-operating  with  them,  the  guerrillas  have 
frequently  retaliated  by  seizing  prominent 
Union  citizens  and  holding  them  as  host 
ages  for  the  release  of  their  allies.  At  other 
times  our  Government  has  been  officially 
notified  by  the  rebel  authorities  that  if  the 
members  of  the  order  captured  were  not 
treated  by  us  as  ordinary  prisoners  of  war, 
retaliation  would  be  resorted  to. 

An  atrocious  plan  of  concert  between 
members  of  the  order  in  Indiana  and  cer 
tain  guerrilla  bands  of  Kentucky,  agreed 
upon  last  spring,  may  be  here  remarked 
upon.  Some  two  thousand  five  hundred  or 
three  thousand  guerrillas  were  to  be  thrown 
into  the  border  counties,  and  were  to  as 
sume  the  character  of  refugees  seeking  em 
ployment.  Being  armed  they  were  secretly 
to  destroy  Government  property  wherever 
practicable,  and  subsequently  to  control  the 
elections  by  force,  prevent  enlistments,  aid 
deserters,  and  stir  up  strife  between  the 
civil  and  military  authorities. 


A  singular  feature  of  the  raids  of  the  en 
emy  remains  only  to  be  adverted  to,  viz. : 
that  the  officers  conducting  these  raids  are 
furnished  by  the  rebel  Government  with 
quantities  of  United  States  Treasury  notes 
for  use  withrn  our  lines,  and  that  these  are 
probably  most  frequently  procured  through 
the  agency  of  members  of  the  order. 

Mary  Ann  Pitman  states  that  Forrest,  of 
the  rebel  army,  at  one  time  exhibited  to 
her  a  letter  to  himself  from  a  prominent 
rebel  sympathizer  and  member  of  the  order 
in  Washington,  D.  C..  in  which  it  was  set 
forth  that  the  sum  of  $20,000  in  "green 
backs"  had  actually  been  forwarded  by  him 
to  the  rebel  Government  at  Richmond. 

8.  Destruction  of  •  Government  Properly.  — 
There  is  no  doubt  that  large  quantities  of 
Government  property  have  been  burned  or 
otherwise  destroyed  by  the  agency  of  the 
order  in  different  localities.  At  Louisville, 
in  the  case  of  the  steamer  Taylor,  and  on 
the  Mississippi  river,  steamers  belonging  to 
the  United  States  have  been  burned  at  the 
wharves,  and  generally  when  loaded  with 
Government  stores.  Shortly  before  the  ar 
rest  of  Bowles,  the  senior  of  the  major  gen 
erals  of  the  order  in  Indiana,  he  had  been 
engaged  in  the  preparation  of  "Greek 
Fire."  which,  it  was  supposed,  would  be 
found  serviceable  in  the  destruction  of  pub- 
i  lie  property.  Jt  was  generally  understood 
in  the  councils  of  the  order  in  the  State  of 
Kentucky  that  they  were  to  be  compen 
sated  for  such  destruction  by  the  rebel  Gov 
ernment,  by  receiving  a  commission  of  ten 
p-er  cent,  of  the  value  of  the  property  so 
destroyed,  and  that  this  value  was  to  be  de 
rived  from  the  estimate  of  the  loss  made  in 
each;  case  by  Northern  newspapers. 
•'  9.y  Destruction  of  Private  Property  and  Perse 
cution  of  Loyal  Men. — It  is  reported  by  Gen 
eral  Carrington  that  the  full  development 
of  the  order  in  Indiana  "was  followed  by  "a 
state  of  terrorism  "  among  the  Union  resi 
dents  of  "portions  of  Brown,  Morgan, 
Johnson,  Rush,  Clay,  Sullivan,  Bartholo 
mew,  Hendricks,  and  other  counties "  in 
that  State;  that  from  some  localities  indi 
viduals  were  driven  away  altogether;  that 
in  others  their  barns,  hay  and  wheat-racks 
were  burned;  and  that  many  persons, 
under  the  general  insecurity  of  life  and 
property,  sold  their  effects  at  a  sacrifice 
and  removed  to  other  places.  At  one  time 
in  Brown  county,  the  members  of  the  order 
openly  threatened  the  lives  of  all  "Aboli 
tionists"  who  refused  to  sign  a  peace  me 
morial  which  they  had  prepared  and  ad 
dressed  to  Congress.  In  Missouri,  also, 
similar  outrages  committed  upon  the  prop 
erty  of  loyal  citizens  are  attributable  in  a 
great  degree  to  the  secret  order. 

Here  the  outbreak  of  the  miners  in  the 
coal  districts  of  Eastern  Pennsylvania,  in 
the  autumn  of  last  year,  may  be  appropri 
ately  referred  to.  It  was  fully  shown  in  the 


336 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


testimony  adduced,  upon  the  trials  of  these 
insurgents,  who  were  guilty  of  the  destruc 
tion  of  property  and  numerous  acts  of  vio 
lence,  as  well  as  murder,  that  they  were 
generally  members  of  a  secret  treasonable 
association,  similar  in  all  respects  to  the 
Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle,  at  the  meetr 
ings  of  which  they  had  been  incited  to  the 
commission  of  the  crimes  for  which  they 
were  tried  and  convicted. 

10.  Assassination  and  Murder. — After  what 
has  been  disclosed  in  regard  to  this  infa 
mous  league  of  traitors  and  ruffians,  it  will 
not  be  a  matter  of  surprise  to  learn  that 
the  cold-blooded  assassination  of  Union  cit 
izens  and  soldiers  has  been  included  in  their 
devilish  scheme  of  operations.  Green  B. 
Smith  states  in  his  confession  that  "  the  se 
cret  assassination  of  United  States  officers, 
soldiers,  and  Government  employes,  has 
been  discussed  in  the  councils  of  the  order 
and  recommended."  It  is  also  shown  in 
the  course  of  the  testimony  that  at  a  large 
meeting  of  the  order  in  St.  Louis,  in  May 
or  June  last,  it  was  proposed  to  form  a 
secret  police  of  members  for  the  purpose  of 
patrolling  the  streets  of  that  city  at  night 
and  killing  every  detective,  and  soldier  that 
could  be  readily  disposed  of;  that  this  prop 
osition  was  coolly  considered,  and  finally 
rejected,  not  because  of  its  fiendish  charac 
ter — no  voice  being  raised  against  its  crim 
inality — but  because  only  it  was  deemed 
premature.  At  Louisville,  in  June  last,  a 
similar  scheme  was  discussed  among  the 
order  for  the  waylaying  and  butchering  of 
negro  soldiers  in  the  streets  at  night ;  and 
in  the  same  month  a  party  of  its  members 
in  that  city  was  actually  organized  for  the 
purpose  of  throwing  off  the  track  of  the 
Nashville  railroad  a  train  of  colored  troops 
and  seizing  the  opportunity  to  take  the 
lives  of  as  many  as  possible.  Again,  in 
July,  the  assassination  of  an  obnoxious  pro 
vost  marshal,  by  betraying  him  into  the 
hands  of  guerrillas,  was  designed  by  mem 
bers  in  the  interior  of  Kentucky.  Further, 
at  a  meeting  of  the  Grand  Council  of  Indiana 
at  Indianapolis  on  June  14th  last,  the  mur 
der  of  one  Coffin,  a  Government  detective, 
who,  as  it  was  supposed,  had  betrayed  the 
order,  was  deliberately  discussed  and  unani 
mously  determined  upon.  This  fact  is  stated 
by  Stidger  in  his  report  to  General  Carring- 
ton  of  June  17th  last,  and  is  more  fully  set 
forth  in  his  testimony  upon  the  trial  of 
Dodd.  He  deposes  that  at  the  meeting  in 
question,  Dodd  himself  volunteered  to  go 
to  Hamilton,  Ohio,  where  Coffin  was  ex 
pected  to  be  found,  and  there  "dispose  of 
the  latter."  He  adds  that  prior  to  the 
meeting,  he  himself  conveyed  from  Judge 
Bullitt,  at  Louisville,  to  Bowles  and  Dodd, 
at  Indianapolis,  special  instructions  to  have 
Coffin  ''  put  out  of  the  way" — "murdered" — 
"at  all  hazards." 

The  opinion  is  expressed  by  Colonel  San 


derson,  under  date  of  June  12th  last,  that 
the  recent  numerous  cold-blooded  assas 
sinations  of  military  officers  and  uncondi 
tional  Union  men  throughout  the  military 
district  of  North  Missouri,  especially  along 
the  western  border,"  is  to  be  ascribed  to 
the  agency  of  the  order.  The  witness  Pit 
man  represents  that  it  is  "a  part  of  the 
obligation  or  understanding  of  the  order" 
to  kill  officers  and  soldiers  "whenever  it  can 
be  done  by  stealth"  as  well  as  loyal  citizens 
when  considered  important  or  influential 
persons ;  and  she  adds,  that  while  at  Mem 
phis,  during  the  past  summer,  she  knew  that 
men  on  picket  were  secretly  killed  by 
members  of  the  order  approaching  them  in 
disguise. 

In  this  connection  may  be  recalled  the 
wholesale  assassination  of  Union  soldiers 
by  members  of  the  order  and  their  confed 
erates  at  Charleston,  Illinois,  in  March  last, 
in  regard  to  which,  as  a  startling  episode  of 
the  rebellion,  a  full  report  was  addressed 
from  this  office  to  the  President,  under  date 
of  July  26th  last.  This  concerted  murder 
ous  assault  upon  a  scattered  body  of  men, 
mostly  unarmed — apparently  designed  for 
the  mere  purpose  of  destroying  as  many  lives 
of  Union  soldiers  as  possible — is  a  forcible 
illustration  of  the  utter  malignity  and  de 
pravity  which  characterize  the  members  of 
this  order  in  their  zeal  to  commend  them 
selves  as  allies  to  their  fellow-conspirators 
at  the  South. 

11.  Establishment  of  a  North-western  Confeder 
acy. — ,In  concluding  this  review  of  some  of 
the  principal  specific  purposes  of  the  order, 
it  remains  only  to  remark  upon  a  further 
design  of  many  of  its  leading  members,  the 
accomplishment  of  which  they  are  re-pre 
sented  as  having  deeply  at  heart.  Hating 
New  England,  and  jealous  of  her  influence 
and  resources,  and  claiming  that  the  inter 
ests  of  the  West  and  South,  naturally  con 
nected  as  they  are  through  the  Mississippi 
valley,  are  identical,  and  actuated  further 
by  an  intensely  revolutionary  spirit  as  well 
as  an  unbridled  and  unprincipled  ambition, 
these  men  have  made  the  establishment  of 
a  Western  or  North-western  Confederacy, 
in  alliance  with  the  South,  the  grand  aim 
and  end  of  all  their  plotting  and  conspir 
ing.  It  is  with  this  steadily  in  prospect 
that  they  are  constantly  seeking  to  produce 
discontent,  disorganization,  and  civil  dis 
order  at  the  North.  With  this  in  view, 
they  gloat  over  every  reverse  of  the  armies 
of  the  Union,  and  desire  that  the  rebellion 
shall  be  protracted  until  the  resources  of 
the  Government  shall  be  exhausted,  its 
strength  paralyzed,  its  currency  hopelessly 
depreciated,  and  confidence  every-where 
destroyed.  Then,  from  the  anarchy  which, 
under  their  scheme,  is  to  ensue,  the  new 
Confederacy  is  to  arise,  xvhich  is  either  to 
unite  itself  with  that  of  the  South,  or  to 
form  therewith  a  close  and  permanent  alii- 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT   INDIANAPOLIS. 


337 


ance.  Futile  and  extravagant  as  this 
scheme  may  appear,  it  is  yet  the  settled 
purpose  of  many  leading  spirits  of  the  se 
cret  conspiracy,  and  is  their  favorite  subject 
of  thought  and  discussion.  Not  only  is  this 
scheme  deliberated  upon  in  the  lodges  of 
the  order,  but  it  is  openly  proclaimed. 
Members  of  the  Indiana  Legislature,  even, 
have  publicly  announced  it,  and  avowed 
that  they  will  take  their  own  State  out  of 
the  Union,  and  recognize  the  independence 
of  the  South.  A  citizen  captured  by  a 
guerrilla  band  in  Kentucky  last  summer, 
records  the  fact  that  the  establishment  of  a 
new  confederacy  as  the  deliberate  purpose 
of  the  Western  people  was  boastfully  as 
serted  by  these  outlaws,  who  also  assured 
their  prisoner  that  in  the  event  of  such  es 
tablishment  there  would  be  "  a  greater 
rebellion  than  ever !" 

Lastly,  it  is  claimed  that  the  new  confed 
eracy  is  already  organized;  that  it  has  a 
"provisional  government,"  officers,  depart 
ments,  bureaus,  etc.,  in  secret  operation. 
No  comment  is  necessary  to  be  made  upon 
this  treason,  not  now  contemplated  for  the 
first  time  in  our  history.  Suggested  by  the 
present  rebellion,  it  is  the  logical  conse 
quence  of  the  ardent  and  utter  sympathy 
therewith  which  is  the  life  and  inspiration 
of  the  secret  order. 

VIII. THE    WITNESSES  AND   THEIR    TESTIMONY. 

The  facts  detailed  in  the  present  report 
have  been  derived  from  a  great  vartety  of 
dissimilar  sources,  but  all  the  witnesses, 
however  different  their  situations,  concur 
so  pointedly  in  their  testimony,  that  the 
evidence  which  has  thus  b^en  furnished 
must  be  accepted  as  of  an  entirely  satisfac 
tory  character. 

The  principal  witnesses  may  be  classified 
as  follows: 

1.  Shrewd,  intelligent  men,  employed  as 
detectives,  and  with  a  peculiar  talent  for 
their  calling,  who  have  gradually  gained 
the  confidence  of  leading  members  of  the 
order,  and  in  some  cases  have  been  admit 
ted  to  its  temples  and  been  initiated  into 
one  or  more  of  the  degrees.  The  most  re 
markable  of  these  is  Stidger,  formerly  a 
private  soldier  in  our  army,  who,  by  the 
use  of  an  uncommon  address,  though  at 
great  personal  risk,  succeeded  in  establish 
ing  such  intimate  relations  with  Bowles, 
Bullitt,  Dodd,  and  other  leaders  of  the  or 
der  in  Indiana  and  Kentucky,  as  to  be 
appointed  Grand  Secretary  for  the  latter 
State,  a  position  the  most  favorable  for  ob 
taining  information  of  the  plans  of  these 
traitors  and  warning  the  Government  of 
their  intentions.  It  is  to  the  rare  fidelity 
of  this  man,  who  has  also  been  the  princi 
pal  witness  upon  the  trial  of  Dodd,  that  the 
Government  has  been  chiefly  indebted  for 
the  exposure  of  the  designs  of  the  conspir 
ators  in  the  two  States  named. 
22 


2.  Kebel  officers  and  soldiers  voluntarily 
or  involuntarily  making  disclosures  to  our 
military   authorities.      The   most  valuable 
witnesses  of  this  class  are  prisoners  of  war, 
who,  actuated  by   laudable   motives,   have 
of  their    own    accord    furnished    a    large 
amount    of  information  in   regard   to   the 
order,  especially  as  it  exists  in  the  South, 
and   of  the  relations  of  its  members  with 
those  of    the    Northern    section.     Among 
these,  also,  are  soldiers  at  our  prison  camps, 
who,  without  designing  it,  have  made  known 
to  our  officials,   by   the  use    of   the  signs, 
etc.,  of  the  order,  that  they  were  members. 

3.  Scouts  employed  to  travel  through  the 
interior  of    the    border    States,    and    also 
within  or  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  en 
emy's  lines.     The  fact  that  some  of  these 
were  left  entirely  ignorant  of  the  existence 
of  the  order,  upon  being  so  employed,  at 
taches  an  increased  value  to  their  discove 
ries  in  regard  to  its  operations. 

4.  Citizen  prisoners,  to  whom,  while  in 
confinement,  disclosures   were  made  rela 
tive  to  the  existence,  extent,  and  character 
of  the  order  by  fellow-prisoners  who  were' 
leading  members,  and  who,  in  some  instan 
ces,  upon  becoming  intimate  with  the  wit 
ness,  initiated  him  into  one  of  the  degrees. 

5.  Members  of   the  order,  who,  upon  a 
full  acquaintance  with  its  principles,  have 
been  appalled  by  its  infamous  designs,  and 
have  voluntarily  abandoned  it,  freely  mak 
ing  known  their  experience  to  our  military 
authorities.     In  this  class  may  be   placed 
the   female   witness,    Mary    Ann    Pitman, 
who,  though  in  arrest  at  the  period  of  her 
disclosures,  was  yet  induced  to  make  them 
for   the  reason    that,   as  she  says,  "at  the 
last  meeting  which  I  attended  they  passed 
an  order  which  I  consider  as  utterly  atro 
cious   and  barbarous;    so   I   told    them   I 
would    have    nothing    more    to    do    with 
them."     This  woman  was  attached  to  the 
command  of  the  rebel  Forrest,  as  an  officer 
under  the  name  of  "  Lieutenant  Eawley;" 
but,  because  her  sex  afforded  her  unusual  fa 
cilities  for  crossing  our  lines,  she  was  often 
employed   in   the   execution   of  important 
commissions  within  our  territory,  and,  as  a 
member  of  the  order,  was  made  extensively 
acquainted   with   other  members,  both  of 
the  Northern  and  Southern  sections.     Her 
testimony  is  thus  peculiarly  valuable,  and, 
being  a  person  of  unusual  intelligence  and 
force  of  character,  her  statements  are  suc 
cinct,  pointed,   and  emphatic.      They  are 
also  especially  useful  as  fully  corroborating 
those  of  other  witnesses  regarded  as  most 
trustworthy. 

6.  Officers  of  the  order  of  high  rank,  who 
have  been  prompted  to  present  confessions, 
more  or  less  detailed,  in  regard  to  the  or 
der  and   their    connection   with    it.     The 
principals  of    these   are   Hunt,  Dunn,  and 
Smith,  Grand  Commander,  Deputy  Grand 
Commander,  and  Grand  Secretary  of  the 


338 


TREASON   TRIALS   AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


order  in  Missouri,  to  whose  statements  fre 
quent  reference  has  been  made.  These 
confessions,  though  in  some  degree  guarded 
and  disingenuous,  have  furnished  to  the 
Government  much  important  information 
as  to  the  operations  of  the  order,  especially 
in  Missouri,  the  affiliation  of  its  leaders 
with  Price,  etc.  It  is  to  be  noted  that 
Dunn  makes  the  statement  in  common 
with  other  witnesses  that,  in  entering  the 
order,  he  was  quite  ignorant  of  its  ultimate 
purposes.  He  says:  u  I  did  not  become  a 
member  understandingly;  the  initiatory 
step  was  taken  in  the  dark,  without  reflec 
tion  and  without  knowledge." 

7.  Deserters   from  our  army,  who,  upon 
being   apprehended,    confessed    that    they 
had  been  induced  and  assisted  to  desert  by 
members  of  the    order.     It    was,    indeed, 
principally  from  these  confessions  that  the 
existence  of  the  secret  treasonable  organiza 
tion  of  the   Knights   of  the  Golden  Circle 
was  first  discovered  in  Indiana,  in  the  year 
1862. 

8.  Writers    of    anonymous    communica 
tions,  addressed   to   heads  of  departments 
or  provost  marshals,  disclosing  facts  corrobo 
rative  of  other  more  important  statements. 

9.  The  witnesses   before  the  grand  jury 
at   Indianapolis,  in    1863,  when  the  order 
was  formally  presented  as  a  treasonable  or 
ganization,  and  those  whose  testimony  has 
been  recently  introduced  upon  the  trial  of 
Dodd. 

It  need  only  be  added  that  a  most  satis 
factory  test  of  the  credibility  and  weight  of 
much  of  the  evidence  which  has  been  fur 
nished  is  afforded  by  the  printed  testimony 
in  regard  to  the  character  and  intention  of 
the  order,  which  is  found  in  its  National  and 
State  constitutions  and  its  ritual.  Indeed, 
the  statements  of  the  various  witnesses 
are  but  presentations  of  the  logical  and  in 
evitable  consequences  and  results  of  the 
principles  therein  set  forth. 

In  concluding  this  review,  it  remains  only 
to  state  that  a  constant  reference  has  been 
made  to  the  elaborate  official  reports,  in 
regard  to  the  order,  of  Brigadier  General 
Carrington,  commanding  District  of  Indi 
ana,  and  of  Colonel  Sanderson,  Provost 
Marshal  General  of  the  Department  of 
Missouri.  The  great  mass  of  the  testimony 
npon  the  subject  of  this  conspiracy  has 
been  furnished  by  these  officers;  the  latter 
acting  under  the  orders  of  Major  General 
Rosecrans,  and  the  former  co-operating, 
under  the  instructions  of  the  Secretary  of 
War,  with  Major  General  Burbridge,  com 
manding  District  of  Kentucky,  as  well  as 
with  Governor  Morton,  of  Indiana,  who, 
though  at  one  time  greatly  embarrassed, 
by  a  Legislature  strongly  tainted  with  dis 
loyalty,  in  his  efforts  to  repress  this  domes 
tic  enemy,  has  at  last  seen  his  State  relieved 
from  the  danger  of  a  civil  war. 


But,  although  the  treason  of  the  order 
has  been  thoroughly  exposed,  and  although 
its  capacity  for  fatal  mischief  has,  by  means 
of  the  arrest  of  its  leaders,  the  seizure 
of  its  arms,  and  the  other  vigorous  means 
which  have  been  pursued,  been  seriously 
impaired,  it  is  still  busied  with  its  plottings 
against  the  Government,  and  with  its  per 
fidious  designs  in  aid  of  the  Southern  re 
bellion.  It  is  reported  to  have  recently 
adopted  new  signs  and  passwords,  and  its 
members  assert  that  foul  means  will  be 
used  to  prevent  the  success  of  the  Admin 
istration  at  the  coming  election,  and  threats 
en  an  extended  revolt  in  the  event  of  the 
re-election  of  President  Lincoln. 

In  the  presence  of  the  rebellion  and  of 
this  secret  order — which  is  but  its  echo  and 
faithful  ally — we  can  not  but  be  amazed  at 
the  utter  and  widespread  profligacy,  per 
sonal  and  political,  which  these  move 
ments  against  the  Government  disclose. 
The  guilty  men  engaged  in  them,  after 
casting  aside  their  allegiance,  seem  to  have 
trodden  under  foot  every  sentiment  of 
honor  and  every  restraint  of  law,  human 
and  divine.  Judea  produced  but  one 
Judas  Iscariot,  and  Rome,  from  the  sinks 
of  her  demoralization,  produced  but  one 
Catiline ;  and  yet,  as  events  prove,  there 
has  arisen  together  in  our  land  an  entire 
brood  of  such  traitors,  all  animated  by  the 
same  parricidal  spirit,  and  all  struggling  with 
the  same  relentless  malignity  for  the  dis 
memberment  of  our  Union.  Of  this  ex 
traordinary  phenomenon — not  paralleled, 
it  is  believed,  in  the  world's  history — there 
can  be  but  one  explanation,  and  all  these 
blackened  and  fetid  streams  of  crime  may 
well  be  traced  to  the  same  common  foun 
tain.  So  fiercely  intolerant  and  imperious 
was  the  temper  engendered  by  slavery, 
that  when  the  Southern  people,  after  hav 
ing  controlled  the  national  councils  for 
half  a  century,  were  beaten  at  an  election, 
their  leaders  turned  upon  the  Government 
with  the  insolent  fury  with  which  they 
would  have  drawn  their  revolvers  on  a  rebel 
lious  slave  in  one  of  their  negro  quarters; 
and  they  have  continued  since  to  prosecute 
their  warfare,  amid  all  the  barbarisms  and 
atrocities  naturally  and  necessarily  inspired 
by  the  infernal  institution  in  whose  inter 
ests  they  are  sacrificing  alike  themselves  and 
their  country.  Many  of  these  conspirators, 
as  is  well  known,  were  fed,  clothed,  and 
educated  at  the  expense  of  the  nation,  and 
were  loaded  with  its  honors  at  the  very  mo 
ment  they  struck  at  its  life  with  the  horri 
ble  criminality  of  a  son  stabbing  the  bosom 
of  his  own  mother  while  impressing  kisses 
on  his  cheeks.  The  leaders  of  the  trait 
ors  in  the  loyal  States,  who  so  completely 
fraternize  with  these  conspirators,  and 
whose  machinations  are  now  unmasked, 
it  is  as  clearly  the  duty  of  the  Admin 
istration  to  prosecute  and  punish  as  it 


TREASON  TRIALS  AT  INDIANAPOLIS. 


339 


is  its  duty  to  subjugate  the  rebels  who  are  I  ambushed  in  the  haunts  of  this  secret  or- 
openly  in  arms  against  the  Government,  der,  should  rival  in  courage  and  faithful- 
In  the  performance  of  this  duty,  it  is  enti-  ness  the  soldiers  who  are  so  nobly  sustain- 


tied  to  expect,  and  will  doubtless  receive, 
the  zealous  co-operation  of  true  men  every 
where,  who,  in  crushing  the  truculent  foe 


ing   our   flag    on    the   battle-fields   of    the 
South.     Respectfully  submitted, 

J.  HOLT,  Judge  Advocate  General. 


THE  history  of  the  exposure  of  the  North 
western  Conspiracy  would  be  incomplete  with 
out  the  insertion  of  the  following  letter: 

HEADQUARTERS  NORTHERN  DEPARTMENT,  \ 
Columbus,  Ohio,  October  1,  1864.         J 

Major- General  ffalleck,  Chief  of  Staff,  Washing 
ton,  D.  C.: 

GENERAL:  Soon  after  my  arrival  here,  to 
take  command  of  this  Department,  I  was  in 
formed,  from  the  War  Department,  of  secret 
organizations  then  forming  in  some  of  the 
States  of  my  command,  and  instructions  to 
try  and  ferret  them  out.  I  placed  the  papers 
in  the  hands  of  Brigadier-General  H.  B.  Car- 
rington,  stationed  at  Indianapolis,  Indiana, 
through  whom  I  have  been  enabled  to  keep 
the  War  Department  fully  informed  of  the 


measures  being  taken  by  the  disloyal.  Through 
his  energy,  perseverance  and  good  judgment, 
I  am  indebted  for  all  the  information  I  have 
been  able  to  transmit.  Through  the  informa 
tion  thus  obtained,  and  the  measures  taken  in 
consequence  thereof,  we  are  indebted,  mainly, 
to  being  saved  from  the  horrors  of  civil  war 
in  these  States. 

I  can  not  be  relieved  from  the  duties  of  this 
Department,  without   putting  on    record   my 
testimony  in  General  Carrington's  favor. 
I  have  the  honor  to  be,  General, 
Very  respectfully, 

Your  obedient  servant, 

S.  P.  HEINTZELMAN, 

Major-General. 
C.  H.  POTTER,  Assistant  Adjutant-General. 


REPLY    OF   H.    H.    DODD. 


WINDSOE,  C.  W.,  Norember  23,  1864. 
Editors  of  the  Cincinnati  Enquirer: 

GENTLEMEN:  In  your  issue  of  yesterday,  in 
an  editorial  article,  I  notice  the  following 
language: 

"By  the  way,  it  would  be  instructive  to 
learn  where  the  money  carne  from  with  which 
Mr.  Dodd's  pistols  were  purchased;  and  fur 
thermore,  how  Mr.  Dodd — crowded  as  Indiana 
is  with  spies  and  secret  policemen,  every  one  of 
whom  know  him,  or  had  his  portrait  in  pos 
session — contrived  to  escape  to  Canada,  with 
his  pockets  full  of  the  effigies  of  the  Presi 
dent  and  Secretary  of  the  Treasury." 

The  only  force  and  effect  of  which  is  to 
convey  the  idea  that  I  have  been  acting  in  the 
interest  of  the  Administration  party,  and 
have  been  paid  for  my  services,  and  allowed 
to  escape  through  their  instrumentality. 

This  unfounded  assault  upon  my  character, 
originated  with  some  irresponsible  corre 
spondent  of  the  Chicago  Times,  at  Indianapo 
lis,  and  which  has  since  been  made  the  basis 
of  editorial  comments  in  the  Sentinel  and  En 
quirer,  and  thus,  intentionally  or  otherwise, 
you  are  giving  credence  and  publicity  to  the 
"complicity  with  Morton"  dodge,  gotten  up  by  a 
coterie  of  "Sons,"  who  have  seen  fit  to  take  the 
benefit  of  the  "baby  act." 

I  certainly  have  no  objection  to  your  whip 
ping  your  Abolition  'contemporaries,  or  to 
your  censuring  and  condemning  the  men  in 
power  or  their  measures;  but  I  must  enter  my 
solemn  protest  against  the  use  of  my  sore 
back  as  a  medium  to  do  the  one  or  the  other. 
Neither  do  I  complain  of  comments  upon  my 
public  or  private  acts,  political  principles, 
combinations  or  associations,  as  against  abo 
litionism,  terrorism,  despotism,  usurpation, 
oppression  and  military  dictation;  nor  upon 
any  sins  of  commission  or  omission  in  this 
direction.  I  am  ready  to  hear  "charges  and 
specifications,"  of  attempted  assassinations. 
of  estimates  upon  my  ability,  intentions  or 
purposes,  and  this  sort  of  thing;  make  me  out 
an  enemy  to  society  from  either  weakness  or 
ambition;  call  me  a  revolutionist,  or  what 
not,  I  am  willing  to  leave  to  time  to  prove  that 
"The  worst  enemy  to  the  peace  of  mankind  is  he 
who  renders  a  revolution  necessary" 

But  to  charge  me  with  being  a  "spy  and  in 
former"  that  I  would  become  a  decoy  to  lure 
unsuspecting  associates  into  the  boiling  caul 
dron  of  "crime,  hatred  and  malice,"  all  for 
the  "effigies  of  the  President  and  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury,"  is  to  charge  me  with  a 
heinous  crime  against  mankind,  that  I  can 
not  permit  to  be  laid  at  my  door — and  I  may 
not  remain  silent,  when  the  editor  of  the  En 
quirer,  from  personal  knowledge,  knows  me 
incapable  of  playing  such  a  role. 

Do  you  wish  sincerely  to  know  in  regard  to 
the  pistols?  You  will  recollect  that  a  gentle 
man  ID  New  York  claimed  them  as  his  indi 


vidual  property,  and  by  reference  to  my  card. 
published  on  the  oth  day  of  September  last, 
you  will  find  further  explanation  as  to  my  con 
nection  with  the  said  pistols.  It  was  not  then 
considered  even  a  crime  by  Democratic  jour 
nals,  to  buy  and  sell,  or  to  keep  and  bear 
arms.  The  amount  involved  was  not  so  large 
as  to  raise  the  inquiry,  "  Where  the  money  came 
from?" 

My  escape  was  no  great  exploit;  not  suffi 
ciently  so,  at  least,  to  raise  the  question  of 
"How  it  was  contrived?"  A  little  affair  of  this 
sort  could  be  managed  as  well  as  the  purchase 
of  a  few  hundred  pistols,  without  the  inter 
vention  of  the  Government  or  any  of  its 
agents.  You  do  me  great  injustice  when  you 
speak  of  me  as  some  notorious  criminal,  per 
sonally  known  to  all  thief-catchers,  and  whose 
picture  every  detective  in  the  country  carried 
about  with  him.  The  fact  that  I  have  safely 
arrived  in  a  country  where  the  "  majesty  of  the 
law"  is  respected,  fully  proves  the  contrary;  for 
how  could  I  pass  through  a  perfect  forest  of 
detectives,  secret  policemen,  spies,  soldiers  in 
uniform,  soldiers  in  citizens'  dress — in  female 
attire,  dressed  as  hod  carriers,  as  peddlers, 
as  white-washers,  teamsters,  wood-choppers, 
spread  all  through  the  county  of  Marion  and 
adjoining  counties;  swarming  in  the  cities  of 
Indianapolis.  Cincinnati,  Cleveland,  Toledo 
and  Detroit,  and  upon  every  railway  train; 
yet  simply  because  I  was  unknown  to^thern. 
and  because  they  did  not  have  my  picture  in 
their  pockets,  I  passed  through  them  all  un 
noticed. 

It  is  no  longer  necessary  to  attack  my 
honor,  to  prove  the  Democratic  "leaders"  in  no 
way  connected  with  the  "Dodd  conspiracy." 
They  are  no  more  responsible  for  my  acts  than 
I  am  for  theirs,  and  I  am  perfectly  willing 
that  the  acts  of  some  of  them,  in  this  case, 
should  be  the  standard,  if  the  rest  of  them 
will  assent. 

But  the  simple  object  of  this  note,  however, 
was  to  have  you  give  my  denial  to  the  charge 
of  "complicity  with  Morton."  This  is  all  I  ask, 
so  that  the  Democratic  masses  can  see  it  over 
my  own  signature.  I  care  not  who  avers  it. 
I  am  satisfied  to  risk  the  question  of  veracity. 
If  you  are  incredulous,  just  inquire  of  Major 
Burnett,  General  Hovey  or  Colonel  Warner, 
and  methinks  the  energetic  replies  will  be 
entirely  satisfactory. 

It  may  be  that  I  committed  an  error  in 
abandoning  the  "Commission."  Be  this  as  it 
may,  I  regret  exceedingly  to  have  made  any 
plea  either  to  the  jurisdiction  or  to  the  indict 
ment,  or  to  have,  in  any  manner,  recognized 
the  tribunal. 

The  charge  that  I  violated  a  parole  is,  like 
all  the  rest,  utterly  false.  I  was  in  solitary 
confinement  every  moment  from  the  time  of 
my  arrest  until  the  escape. 

Respectfully  yours,  etc., 

H.  H.  DODD. 
340 


PUBLICATIONS  OF  MOORE,  WILSTAOH  &  BALDWIN, 

BAYARD  TAYLOR'S 

CYCLOPEDIA  OF  MODERN  TRAVEL. 

A  Record  of  Adventure,  Exploration  and  Discovery  for  the  past  fifty  years.  Comprising  Narra 
tive*  of  the  most  distinguished  Travelers  tince  the  beginning  of  this  Century.  Prepared  and 
arranged  by  Bayard  Taylor.  1  volume,  royal  8vo.  1034  pp.  Embellished  with  fine  portrait* 
on  steel  by  Buttre,  and  illustrated  by  over  sixty  wood  engravings  by  Orr,  and  thirteen  authentic 
Maps  by  Schonbcrg.  Sold  by  canvassing  agents  only. 

A  magnificent  octavo  volume,  which,  for  general  interest  and  value,  is  worthy  of  the  dis 
tinguished  compiler,  and  equally  worthy  of  universal  patronage.  The  volume  really  con 
tains  the  value  of  a  whole  library,  reliable  as  a  book  of  reference,  and  as  interesting  as  a 
book  of  romance. — Springfield  (Mass.)  Republican. 

The  popular  lectures  and  writings  of  Bayard  Taylor,  have  awakened  in  the  United  States 
a  thirst  for  information  respecting  foreign  countries  and  nations.  A  striking  proof  of  this 
is  given  in  the  fact  that  a  publishing  house  in  Cincinnati  have  issued,  under  the  auspices  of 
Bayard  Taylor,  a  volume  of  nearly  one  thousand  pp.,  devoted  exclusively  to  records  of  travel. 
These  Reports  are  perfectly  reliable ;  the  matters  of  fact  of  each  explorer,  often  in  his  own 
language,  are  condensed  into  a  consecutive  narrative,  by  the  most  competent  living  author 
in  the  same  department. — New  York  Independent. 

The  reading  public  owes  to  Bayard  Taylor  many  a  debt  for  rare  and  valuable  instruction 
.nost  agreeably  conveyed ;  but  we  doubt  if  he  ever  performed  a  more  useful  service  than  in 
compiling  this  massive,  varied  and  most  valuable  volume.  The  entire  circle  of  books  of 
which  he  has  given  the  spirit  and  juice,  would  form  a  library  ;  and  many  of  them  are  now 
almost  inaccessible.  Mr.  Taylor's  part  has  been  conscientiously  done.  It  is  not  merely  a 
work  of  selection  and  groupings ;  much  of  it  is  his  own  statement  of  the  results  more 
voluminously  given,  and  written  in  a  clear  and  elegant  style.  We  can  not  but  regard  it  as 
a  very  useful  as  well  as  entertaining  work,  well  adapted  to  communicate  accurate  and  com 
prehensive  views  of  the  world,  and  supplying  for  families  an  almost  inexhaustible  fund  of 
pleasant  reading. — New  York  Evangelist. 

No  writer  of  the  present  age  can  be  found  so  admirably  qualified  for  such  an  undertak 
ing. — Louisville  Journal. 

Surh  is  the  full  title-page  of  a  magnificent  octavo  volume  of  1034  pages,  ju.-it  issued.  .  . 
.  We  said  "a  magnificent  octavo."  It  is  so  whether  we  consider  its  contents,  or  the 
superb  style  in  which  the  publishers  have  gotten  it  up.  It  is  just  the  book  for  the  family 
library  ;  all  classes  will  be  interested  in  its  perusal. — Ladies'  Repository. 

The  conception  of  this  work  is  admirable  ;  and  its  execution  is  what  might  be  expected 
from  one  of  the  most  accomplished  and  intelligent  travelers  of  the  age.  .  .  It  is  remarkable 
for  its  compactness,  condensation  and  symmetry  ;  and  whoever  will  take  the  time  to  read  it 
through,  will  possess  himself  of  an  amount  of  information,  in  respect  to  the  physical,  intel 
lectual,  and  moral  conditition  of  almost  every  portion  of  the  globe,  which  he  can  scarcely 
expect  to  find  elsewhere.  The  work  is  illustrated  with  a  large  number  of  maps  and  engrav 
ings,  which  are  executed  with  great  skill  and  care,  and  add  much  to  the  interest  of  the  nar 
ratives  to  which  they  are  prefixed. — Puritan  Recorder. 

Mr.  Bayard  Taylor  is  the  very  Ulysses  of  modern  tourists,  and  Emperor  Adrian  of  living 
ramblers — and  so  is  qualified  to  edit,  or  compile,  from  the  works  of  other  travelers.  .  .  . 
It  is  but  the  merest  justice  to  say,  that  Mr.  Taylor  has  done  all  that  even  an  uneasily  satis 
fied  reader  could  expect,  to  produce  a  capital  book. — Boston  Chronicle. 

Apart  from  the  confidence  inspired  by  the  name  of  the  writer,  it  needs  but  a  brief  expla- 
nati  )n  of  its  contents  to  show  that  it  forms  a  highly  important  addition  to  the  family  library. 
Its  pages  are  crowded  with  interesting  information. — New  York  Tribune. 
From  Professor  C.   C.  Felton,  of  Harvard  University. 

A  scholar,  traveler  and  writer,  having  a  reputation  so  deservedly  high  in  this  thtee-fold 
relation  as  Bayard  Taylor,  may  be  presumed  to  give  his  name  only  to  works  worthy  of  it. 
The  present  volume  I  have  examined  carefully,  and  have  read  a  considerable  part  of  it;  and 
I  have  found-  it  prepared  and  arranged  with  excellent  judgment,  and  filled  with  matter  of 
the  highest  interest  and  value.  Both  the  plan  and  execution  are,  in  my  judgment,  marked 
by  ability,  extensive  knowledge,  good  taste,  and  good  sense. 

From  Oliver  Wendell  Holmes,  M.  D.,  Author  of  the  "Autocrat  of  the  Breakfast  Table,1'  eta. 

Mr.  Bayard  Taylor  has  done  the  reading  public  a  great  favor  in  bringing  together  the 
moat  essential  and  interesting  portions  of  so  many  narratives  within  a  vory  moderate  com 
pass,  and  in  such  form  as  to  be  accessible  to  multitudes  whose  libraries  must  take  little- 
room  and  cost  but  moderate  expenditure.  It  is  safe  to  say  that  no  man's  selection  would  b« 
accepted  so  unhesitatingly  in  America  as  those  of  our  own  favorite  travel  story-teller. 

From  Hon.  Robert  C.  Winthrop,  of  Boston,  formerly  Speaker  House  of  Representatives,  U.  8. 

I  have  examined  it  with  great  interest.  It  contains  a  large  amount  of  entertaining  and 
instructive  matter,  very  conveniently  and  carefully  arranged  ;  and  I  shall  value  it  as  a  work 
both  for  present  reading  and  future  reference. 


PUBLICATIONS  OF  MOORE,  WILSTAOH  &  BALDWIN, 

THE  SCIENCE  OF  EDUCATION; 

AND  AKT  OF  TEACHING.    IN  Two  PABTS.    BY  JOHN  OGDEJI,  A.  M. 
One  Volume,  12mo.,  480  pp.    Price,  5 

It  is  proper  to  say  that  Mr.  Ogden  has,  for  many  years,  been  engaged  almost  exclusively 
with  Teachers  and  in  Normal  Schools. 

NOTICES. 

From  the  Rev.  Wm.  Russell,  Slate  Educational  Lecturer,  Massachutetto. 

The  truly  philosophical  and  thoroughly  practical  methods  of  early  culture,  suggested  to 
the  primary  teacher,  if  faithfully  acted  on,  would  make  our  elementary  schools  scenes  of  the 
most  attractive  and  delightful,  as  well  as  instructive,  occupation  for  childhood. 

From  Wm.  F.  Phelps,  A.  M.,  Principal  of  the  New  Jersey  State  Normal  Schools. 
My  Dear  Sir:  Allow  me  to  say  that,  in  my  humble  judgment,  you  have  struck  the  right 
vein,  both  in  the  conception  and  execution  of  your  ideas  regarding  the  Philosophy  of  Teach 
ing.  You  afford  a  splendid  contribution  to  our  limited  means  for  the  training  of  Teachers. 
A  good  scholar  merely  has  fulfilled  only  one  of  the  conditions  essential  to  a  good  educator. 
What  we  most  need  is  a  clear  elucidation  and  a  scientific  classification  of  the  principles  of 
education,  so  that  they  may  be  mastered  and  applied  to  the  rearing  and  training  of  rational 
and  immortal  beings.  I  need  not  assure  you  that  this  task  you  have,  according  to  my  no 
tions,  most  happily  executed.  The  application  of  diagrams  to  the  work  seems  to  me  to  be  a 
happy  thought,  addressing  the  subject  to  that  most  perfect  of  all  senses,  the  sense  of  sight. 

From  Cyrus  Knowlfon,  Esq.,  Principal  of  Hughes  High  School,  Cincinnati. 

It  is  by  far  the  best  work  of  the  kind  with  which  I  am  acquainted. 

From  A.  J.  Ricko/,  late  Superintendent  of  Cincinnati  Public  Schools. 

MESSRS.  MOORE,  WILSTACII  &  BALDWIN  :  I  have  given  attention  to  every  work  announced 
in  England  or  this  country,  treating  upon  this  subject;  and  I  may  say,  without  hesitation, 
that  Mr.  Ogdeu's  treatise  is,  in  its  conception  and  arrangement,  the  most  scientific  among 
them  all.  It  can  not  be  read  by  the  teacher  without  great  practical  advantage  ;  it  will  pre 
pare  him  for  the  business  of  the  schoolroom  ;  it  will  give  new  direction  to  his  speculations ; 
it  will,  I  believe,  greatly  assist  to  establish  the  business  of  teaching  as  a  profession. 

Schoolmasters  owe  it  to  themselves  and  their  profession,  to  give  this  book  a  circulation 
never  yet  reached  by  any  of  a  similar  character.  Its  use  should  not  be  confined  to  teachers 
alone.  It  should  find  a  place  in  the  library  of  every  family,  as  the  most  valuable  contribu 
tion  yet  made  in  our  language  for  the  advancement  of  education. 

OGDEN  ON  EDUCATION, 

Is  a  very  full  and  systematic  work  on  the  general  subject  of  education,  full  of  suggestive 
thoughts,  tersely  expressed.  They  deserve  and  demand  proper  consideration,  seasoned  by 
that  confidence  in  their  author  which  his  evident  carefulness  and  experience  beget. — Rhode 
Island  Schoolmaster. 

In  just  the  hand-took  for  teachers  who  intend  to  be  thorough  and  foremost  in  their  pro 
fession.  Intelligent  parents  would  find  it  an  interesting  and  valuable  aid  in  the  hours  when 
they  "ponder  in  their  hearts"  how  to  bring  up  children. — Toronto  (C.  W.)  Colonist. 

A  very  elaborate,  philosophical,  and  thorough  work  on  a  great  subject,  too  much  over 
looked  by  thinking  men.  .  .  Must  be  immensely  valuable  to  every  parent  and  teacher. — 
JST.  I".  Observer. 

Contains,  in  a  single  volume,  a  great  deal  of  valuable  material.  The  whole  subject  of 
human  culture  is  laid  before  the  reader,  and  treated  in  simple,  yet  comprehensive  language. 
.  .  .  Parents  and  teachers  should  be  induced  to  study  this  excellent  work. — Massachu 
setts  Teacher. 

Has  many  features,  both  novel  and  ingenious,  which  entitle  it  to  consideration  as  an 
f  riginal  work. — New  York  Century. 

Enters  very  fully  and  closely  into  the  philosophy  of  teaching. — Philadelphia  Press. 

Is  a  sound,  judicious  and  original  work.  It  does  not  deal  in  commonly-received  notions, 
but  really  enters  into  the  profound  themes,  upon  which  it  treats  with  great  strength  of 
thought,  keenness  of  perception,  and  practical  skill. — Zion's  Herald,  Boston. 

It  is  the  only  work  extant  that  can  pretend  to  a  full  and  complete  system  of  instruction. 
Much  has  previously  been  written  on  the  subject  that  is  valuable,  which  has  failed,  however, 
in  a  great  measure,  to  become  available,  because  of  the  ab«»nce  of  system,  and  a  failure  even 
to  recognize  a  systematic  arrangement  as  a  desideratum.  Mr.  Ogden  approximates  mor« 
nearly  a  scientific  treatment  of  his  subject  than  any  author  we  have  met.— Iowa,  Instructor 
and  School  Journal. 


PUBLICATIONS  OF  MOORE,  WILSTACH  &  BALDWIA, 


RUFUS  CHOATE'S  FAVORITE  AUTHOR  ON  RHETORIC. 

A  SUCCESSFUL  NEW  SCHOOL  BOOK. 

RHETORICAL  PRAXIS: 

The  principles  of  Rhetoric  Exemplified  and  Applied  in  Copious  Exercises  for  Systematic 
Practice,  chiefly  in  the  Development  of  Thought. 

BY  HENRY  W.  DAY,  A.  JML, 

Author  of  "  The  Art  of  Elocution,"  and  of  "  Elements  of  the  Art  of  Rhetoric."    One  vol 
ume,  12mo.,  309  pages.     Price,  75  cents. 


From  the  Superintendent  of  Circleville  (0.)  Public  Schools. 

I  hnvo  examined  it  carefully,  and  with  much  satisfaction.  I  believe  it  is  a  most  excellent 
work,  and  needs  only  to  be  known  to  secure  for  it  an  introduction  iato  all  our  High  Schools. 
We  have  adopted  it  as  a  text-book.  Respectfully  yours,  JOHN  LYNCH. 

From  the  Neio  York  Independent. 

The  design  of  this  work  is  to  train  the  pupil  in  the  principles  of  Rhetoric  as  applied  to 
the  unfolding  of  thought ;  so  that  Rhetoric,  instead  of  an  artificial  code  of  rules,  is  a  philo 
sophical  outgrowth  of  ideas  and  the  principles  of  language.  The  plan  is  excellent,  and  the 
various  exercises  are  prepared  with  judgment  and  skill.  The  pupil  is  taught  to  analyze  his 
ideas ;  to  get  at  the  theme  or  proposition  to  be  stated ;  and  then  to  frame  this  in  appro 
priate  words.  Prof.  Day  brings  to  his  task  philosophical  judgment,  refined  taste  and  prac 
tical  experience.  His  work  should  become  a  text-book  iu  all  schools,  in  lieu  of  the  cus 
tomary  exercises  in  composition. 

From  the  New  Englander,  November,  1860. 

Rhetorical  Praxis. — Books  of  Rhetorical  Praxis  are  usually  the  dullest  and  most  unprofit 
able  of  all  text-books.  The  ingenious  author  of  this  volume  has  certainly  proposed  to  him 
self  the  true  ideal  to  be  accomplished  in  teaching  Rhetoric;  for  he  would  teach  his  pupil  to 
write  by  teaching  him  to  think.  We  believe  this  book  to  be  superior  to  any  other  of  the 
kind,  and  to  have  the  highest  claim  upon  practical  teachers  for  a  trial,  for  its  thoroughness, 
its  comprehensiveness,  as  well  as  for  the  great  ingenuity  and  skill  with  which  it  has  been 
prepared.  We  recommend  it  most  cordially  to  teachers. 

From  the  Educational  Repository  and  Family  Monthly,  Atlanta^  Georgia. 
It  is  a  thoroughly  practical  treatise  for  developing  the  art  of  discourse  upon  a  true  idea. 
Almost  all  systems  of  Rhetoric  which  are  in  .common  use  in  the  English  language,  proceed 
upon  the  idea  that  style  is  every  thing,  and  pay  but  little  attention  to  the  thought  itself. 
This  work  jnst  reverses  these  plans,  goes  back  to  the  systems  of  the  Greek  fathers  in  Rhet 
oric,  and  finds  the  true  doctrine  in  the  fact  so  well  stated  by  Daniel  Webster,  that  "  all  true 
power  in  writing  is  iu  the  idea,  not  in  the  style,"  and  that  the  first  of  all  requisites,  as  Sir 
Walter  Scott  observes,  is  in  "  having  something  to  say."  The  "  Development  of  the  Thought " 
is  the  basis  ;  and  when  the  thought  stands  out  in  all  its  well-built  proportions,  the  drapery 
of- style  is  thrown  around  it.  We  haven't  space  to  give  as  thorough  a  notice  of  this  work 
as  we  feel  inclined  to  do.  No  better  book  can  be  placed  in  the  hands  of  young  students  iu 
our  male  colleges.  It  should  be  closely  studied  by  every  Freshman  class  in  every  college, 
Hiul  in  all  the  high  schools  in  this  country.  If  a  teacher  can  not  succeed  in  teaching  the  art 
of  composition  with  this  work,  he  need  try  no  other.  More  than  five  hundred  themes  are 
given  in  the  latter  part,  adapted  to  all  grades  and  classes.  We  sincerely  wish  we  could  have 
had  this  book  years  ago. 

From  the  New  York  Observer,  November,  I860. 

This  work  is  truly  scientific  and  practical.  It  seizes  the  old  idea  of  invention,  unfolded 
by  both  Aristotle  and  Cicero,  and  develops  it  in  the  light  of  modern  metaphysics,  and  thus 
illuminates  it  and  adapts  it  to  the  present  analysis  of  the  mental  powers.  It  is,  to  all  intents 
and  purposes,  the  art  of  thinking,  rather  than  of  writing.  It  makes  thought  the  pedestal' 
style  the  shaft ;  ideas  the  soul,  and  body,  too,  of  composition  ;  style  the  mere  habiliments — 
the  having  something  to  say — the  motive  power — the  manner  of  saying  it — the  mere  ma 
chinery,  in  one  case  characterized  by  strength,  in  another  by  grace,  beauty  and  polish. 

The  object  of  the  Praxis,  then,  is  to  induct  the  pupil  into  the  habit  of  thought,  to  teach 
him  to  select  au  object  or  subject  on  which  he  shall  fix  his  mental  powers,  aud  then  put 
down,  without  regard  at  first  to  style,  just  the  ideas  arising  in  his  own  mind,  as  he  carefullj 
and  continuously  beholds  or  contemplates  the  object. 

Let  teachers  try  it ;  they  will  not  be  disappc  'nted.    It  is  an  aid  in  the  right  direction. 


PUBLICATIONS  OF  MOORE,  WILSTACH  &  BALDWIN. 


A  New  and  Complete  Hymn  and   Tune  Book  for  Sabbath 

Schools. 

BY    WILLIAM    B.    BRADBURY.      Author  of   "The  Shawm,"  "The    Ju 
bilee,"  "  Singing-Bird,"  "  Sabbath-School  Choir,"  etc. 

From  the  New  York  Observer. 

This  is  a  large  collection  of  Hymns  and  Tunes,  admirably  adapted  to  the  use  of  Sabbath 
Schools  and  all  occasions  for  social  singing  among  the  young.  The  tunes  are  judiciously 
selected,  comprising  a  large  number  of  those  which  are  favorites  with  the  children,  uud 
altogether  it  is  the  most  complete  work  ef  the  kind  that  we  have  ever  seen. 

From  the  New  York  Evangelist,  September. 

One  of  the  most  attractive  features  of  the  Sabbath  School,  next  after,  and  sometimes  even 
before  that  of  the  library,  is  the  singing.  To  improve  this,  and  to  make  it  the  channel  for 
conveying  truth,  in  the  beautiful  form  of  hymns,  to  the  young  mind,  is  a  noble  aim.  The 
author  has  essayed  to  meet  this  object,  and  has  furnished  ns  with  a  volume  containing  not 
far  from  500  hymns  and  tunes.  We  have  been  much  pleased  with  the  tasteful  and  judicious 
manner  in  which  the  iask  has  been  executed. 

From  the  New  York  Century,  September. 

The  object  of  this  book  is  to  raise  and  vary  the  character  of  music  and  singing,  which  are 
important  elements  in  Sabbath  School  tuition.  All  the  melodies  it  contains  have  been  welJ 
selected,  and  are  associated  with  pure  and  elevated  ideas.  Simple  directions  are  given  for 
the  learning  of  new  tunes.  \Ve  can  safely  recommend  it  to  the  attention  of  teachers  uud 
learners  of  singing  classes. 

From  the  Presbyterian  Herald,  Louisville. 

O-j'ofa.  —  We  have  received  from  the  Publishers  a  copy  of  a  little  Hymn  and  Tune  Bool:  for 
Sabbath  Schools,  by  Win.  B.  Bradbury,  with  the  above  title.  For  several  reasons  we  deem  it 
the  best  that  we  have  seen,  and  cordially  recommend  it.  1st.  It  is  the  best  and  has  the 
greatest  variety  of  tunes,  having  2f>0  pages  and  nearly  200  tunes.  2d.  There  are  several  sets 
of  words  to  each  tune,  thus  keeping  it  fresh  for  a  longer  time.  3d.  The  selection  of  both 
words  and  tunes  is  altogether  the  best  we  know  of.  4th.  It  contains  many  of  the  good  old 
church  tunes  and  hymns  which  should  be  taught  to  Sabbath  Schools,  as  well  as  the  peculiar 
Sabbath  School  tunes.  It  contains,  viz.:  Ortonville,  Laban,  Balerma,  Zephyr,  Martyn, 
Hebron,  Duke  Street,  Old  Hundred,  and  the  like.  This  is  a  very  great  recommendation, 
aiding,  as  it  does,  the  much-coveted,  yet  rare  congregational  singing. 

From  the  Christian  Times,  Chicago. 

"  ORIOLA  "  contains  a  fine  selection  of  Tunes  and  Hymns,  specially  adapted  for  Sunday 
Schools.  Most  of  the  good  popular  Sunday  School  melodies  of  the  present  day  are  inserted, 
while  a  large  number  of  new  pieces  have  been  composed  expressly  for  this  work.  "  Animated, 
but  not  boisterous  ;  gentle,  but  not  dull  or  tame  "  are  directions  that  will  apply  to  mo?t 
of  the  compositions  in  this  book. 

From  the  Central  Christian  Herald. 

It  contains  those  pieces  which  have  been  sung  with  such  interest  and  effect  at  Sabbath 
School  meetings  and  Union  meetings  of  various  kinds  for  a  few  years  past.  In  addition  to 
these  choice  old  friends.  Mr.  Bradbury  presents  to  us  some  of  his  best  music,  composed 
expressly  for  this  work.  It  is  undoubtedly  the  Sabbath  School  Hymn  and  Tune  Book  of  our 
day.  and  must  come  at  once  into  general  use. 

POMEROY,  OHIO,  September. 

Ir.  my  judgment  as  a  musician,  after  twenty  years'  experience,  I  have  never  seen  as  good 
a  book  for  Sabbath  School  children.  Yours,  respectfully,  A.  W.  WILLIAMS. 

Bev.  W.  C.  VAN  METER,  of  the  Fourth  Ward  Mission,  New  York,  for  several  years,  and, 
until  very  recently,  connected  with  the  Five  Points'  Mission,  writes  to  the  publishers: 

"  Success  to  the  '  Oriola  !  '  The  more  I  see  of  it  the  better  I  like  it.  I  wish  all  my  favor 
ites  were  in  it  ;  but  as  it  is,  the  book  is  the  best  now  out." 

From  T.  J.  Tone,  Principal  George  Street  Public  School. 

CINCINNATI,  October. 

Dear  Sir:  In  your  "Oriola"  I  find  a  large  collection  of  gems,  well  adapted  to  meet  the 
wants  of  our  Sunday  Schools.  We  have  had  it  in  use  nearly  two  months,  and  have  been 
delighted  in  rehearsing  its  contents.  Children  love  music  that  is  cheerful,  lively  and  flow 
ing.  Their  young  and  fervent  affections  feed  upon  thai  which  is  passionate  and  jubilant. 
Among  the  characteristics  of  your  book,  I  am  happy  to  find  these  very  marked. 
Yours,  truly. 


PUBLICATIONS  OF  MOOBE,  WILSTACH  &  BALDWIN. 

THE  WHEAT  PLANT: 

It*  Origin,  Culture,  Growth,  Development,  Compotition,  Varieties,  Diseases,  ttc. ;  together  with  4 
Chapter  on  Indian  Corn,  it*  Culture,  etc.  By  JOHN  H.  KLIPPAUT,  Corretponding  Secretary 
of  the  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agriculture.  One  hundred  Illustrations.  One  volume  12mo.,  pp. 
706.  Price,  81  60. 

From  th«  Cincinnati  Commercial. 

No  work  in  the  language  will  be  found  to  equal  It  in  the  complete,  thorough  discussion 
of  the  great  cereal  in  its  entire  history.  The  book  ought  to  be  considered  indispensable  to 
every  farmer,  and  will  be  an  addition  to  the  library  of  every  intelligent  merchant  as  well 
as  devotee  to  science. 

From  the  Milwaukee  Daily  Wisconsin. 

We  hare  read  it  with  profit  and  interest.  It  should  be  placed  in  the  hands  of  every  farmei 
in  Wisconsin.  Ohio  is  one  of  the  best  wheat-growing  States  of  the  Union  ;  yet  the  average 
of  wheat  to  the  acre  has  declined  from  twenty-five  bushels  to  thirteen — all  for  the  want  of 
cultivation  by  artificial  stimulants  and  manures.  In  England  the  crop  haa  been  more  than 
doubled,  until  it  now  averages  thirty-six  bushels  to  the  acre.  This  haa  been  accomplished 
by  the  closest  attention  to  the  wants  of  the  soil. 

From  the  New  York  Tribune. 

The  author  of  this  instructive  treatise  has  employed  the  labor  of  many  yean  to  a  thor 
ough  investigation  of  the  important  plant  to  which  it  is  devoted.  A  minute  and  accurate 
knowledge  of  the  subject  is  exhibited  on  every  page,  and  its  fullness  of  detail,  clearness  of 
illustration,  and  variety  of  information,  must  at  once  elevate  it  to  the  rank  of  a  stan 
dard  authority. 

From  the  Iowa  State  Democrat. 

It  would  occupy  too  much  space  to  go  into  a  general  review  of  this  truly  valuable  work, 
but  we  must  content  ourselves  with  a  few  brief  sentences  taken  at  random.  .  .  .  It  is 
highly  important  that  it  should  be  in  the  hands  of  every  farmer  in  the  Union. 

From  the  Louisville  Journal. 

The  above  is  a  work  of  over  seven  hundred  pages,  comprehending  all  that  is  known  as  to 
the  physiology,  culture,  varieties,  diseases,  etc.,  of  the  wheat  plant.  The  first  comprehen- 
»ive  treatise  ever  produced  in  this  country  on  this  subject,  and  perhaps  the  most  thorough 
work  on  the  subject  ever  published.  .... 

From  the  Cleveland  Morning  Leader. 

The  importance  to  farmers  and  all  agriculturists  of  such  a  book  as  this,  written  with 
great  care  by  such  an  author,  can  not  be  too  highly  estimated.  The  Wheat  crop  is  the 
great  crop  of  the  West.  .  .  .  Mr.  Klippart,  from  his  widely-extended  acquaint 
ance  with  eminent  and  practical  agriculturists,  has  abundant  means  for  comparing  notes 
and  making  practical  observations,  which  his  abilities  as  an  author  enable  him  to  present, 
in  the  most  beneficial  manner,  to  those  interested.  ....  Every  farmer 
should  have  a  copy  of  this  invaluable  work.  It  will  amply  repay  its  cost. 

From  the  Davenport  Daily  Gazette. 

This  work  has  been  prepared  with  great  care  by  a  man  perhaps  better  qualified  for  the 
task  than  any  other  person  in  the  country.  He  has  produced  a  work  which  should  be  in 
the  hands  of  every  agriculturist,  as  it  contains  a  vast  amount  of  information  which,  if 
properly  put  into  practice,  must  result  in  better  and  more  certain  wheat  crops. 

From  the  American  Farmer,  Baltimore. 

We  have  examined  this  work  with  great  interest,  and  have  marked  many  of  its  pages  for 
future  reference  and  quotations  in  our  magazine. 

From  Prof.  Hoyt,  in  Wisconsin  Farmer. 

The  most  elaborate,  but  also  the  most  valuable  production  hitherto  published  on  that 
important  subject  in  this  country. 

From  L.  V.  Bierce,  in  Ohio  Farmer. 

To  point  out  any  particular  portion  as  particularly  excellent,  where  all  is  first-rate,  is  a 
difficult  task.  No  farmer  should  be  without  it. 

From  the  Country  Gentleman. 

It  is  the  result  of  careful  and  untiring  investigation,  which,  although  conducted  with 
special  reference  to  this  crop,  its  varieties,  growth,  etc.,  in  Ohio,  can  not  but  be  of  great 
•erric*  to  the  farmers  of  other  States. 


PUBLICATIONS  OP  MOORE,  WILSTAOH  &  BALDWIN. 

PRACTICAL  LANDSCAPE  GARDENING. 

By  G.  M.  KF.EN.      Containing  Twenty-two  Illustrations  and  Plans  for  laying  out  Grounds,  %eit* 
full  direction  for  Planting  Shade  Tree*.  Shrubbery  and  Flowers.    Third  Edition.     One  volumt, 
12roo.,  Muslin.     Price,  $1  50. 
Mr.  Kern  has  produced  the  right  book  at  the  right  moment. — Putnam's  Magazine. 

His  suggestions  are  in  an  eminent  degree  valuable,  and  his  opinions  (which  are  ex 
pressed  in  clear,  concise,  and  lucid  diction)  easily  interpreted,  by  even  the  most  limited 
conception,  fairly  assert  his  claim  to  a  station  iu  the  foremost  rank  of  rural  improvers. — 
N.  Y.  Horticulturitt. 

It  abounds  in  useful  and  tasteful  suggestions,  and  in  practical  instructions.— Northern 
Partner. 

It  is  a  Tery  timely  and  valuable  book Better  adapted  to  the  wants  and  cir 
cumstances  of  our  people  than  any  other  upon  the  subject. — Ohio  Cultivator. 

No  one  can  long  walk  hand  in  hand  with  Mr.  Kern  without  being  sensible  that  he  is  in 
th»  hands  of  one  who  is  worthy  of  all  confidence. — Louisville  Courier. 

Has  so  nobly  succeeded  as  to  render  his  volume  an  invaluable  acquisition  to  all. — Boston 
Traveler. 

It  is  plain  in  its  details,  and  will  be  more  valuable  to  the  million  than  any  work  on  the 
Bubject  of  Landscape  Gardening  yet  published.  The  mechanical  execution  of  the  volume  is 
the  very  perfection  of  printing  and  binding. — Ohio  Farmer. 

Admirably  calculated  to  meet  the  wants  of  fhe  public. — Boston  Allot. 

By  a  careful  perusal  of  this  little  volume,  which  will  cost  but  $1  50,  tho  purchaser  will 
probably  find  that  he  has  learned  what  he  has  been  all  his  life  wishing  to  know,  and  what 
will  be  worth  to  him  more  than  ten  times  its  cost. — Nashville  Whig. 

He  descends  to  the  minutest  details  of  instruction,  so  that  his  book  mav  be  taken  as  a 
manual  for  the  practical  operator. — N.  T.  Evangelist. 


GRAPE  AND, STRAWBERRY  CULTURE. 

ttc  Culture  of  the  Grape  and  Wine  Making.  By  ROBERT  BUCHANAN.  With  an  Appendix,  con 
taining  Direction*  for  the  Cultivation  of  the  Strawberry.  By  N.  LONOWORTH.  Sixth  Edition. 
One  volume,  I2mo.,  Muslin.  Price,  63  cents. 

It  contains  much  opportune  and  instructive  information  relative  to  the  cultivation  of 
these  two  delicious  fruits. — Michigan  Farmer. 

One  of  the  books  which  pass  current  through  the  world  on  account  of  the  great  authority 
of  the  author's  name. — Hoboken  Gazette. 

There  are  no  men  better  qualified  for  tho  undertaking. — Louisville  Journal. 

It  deals  more  with  facts,  with  actual  experience  and  observation,  and  less  with  specula 
tion,  supposition  and  belief,  than  any  thing  on  the  topic  that  has  yet  appeared  in  the 
United  States.  In  other  words,  a  man  may  take  it  and  plant  a  vineyard,  and  raise  grapes 
with  success. — Horticulturist. 

We  can  not  too  strongly  recommend  this  little  volume  to  the  attention  of  all  who  have  a 
vine  or  strawberry  bed. — Farm  and  Shop. 

This  book  embodies  the  essential  principles  necessary  to  be  observed  in  the  successful  man 
agement  of  these  fruits. — Boston  Cultivator. 

We  have  on  two  or  three  occasions  said  of  this  little  book,  that  it  is  the  best  we  have  ever 
gaen  on  the  s-ubjects  of  which  it  treats.  A  man  with  ordinary  judgment  can  not  fail  in 
grape  or  strawberry  culture,  if  he  tries  to  follow  its  advice. — Ohio  Farmer. 


HOOPER'S  WESTERN  FRUIT  BOOK. 

A  Compendious  Collection  of  Facts,  from  the  Notes  and  Experience  of  Successful  Fruit  Ouliu- 
rists.    Arranged  for  Practical  we  in  Orchard  and  Garden.     One  volume,  12rm>.,  with  Illustra 
tions.     Price,  $1  00. 
Thr««  thousand  copies  of  this  work  have  already  been  disposed  of. 


PUBLICATIONS  OF  MOOEE,  WILSTAOH  &  BALDWIN. 


RENOUARD'S  HISTORY  OF   MEDICINE. 

A  History  of  Medicinet  from  its  Origin  to  the  Nineteenth  Century,  with  an  Appendix,  containing 
a  series  of  Philosophic  and  Historic  Letters  on  Medicine  of  the  present  Century,  by  Dr.  .Benou- 
ard,  Paris.  Translated  from  the  French,  by  C.  G.  Comegys,  Prof.  Inst.  Med.  in  Miami  Med 
ical  College.  One  volume  octavo.  Sheep.  Price,  $4  00. 

SYNOPTIC  TABLE   OF   CONTENTS : 

I.  AGE  OF  FOUNDATION.  1.  PRIMITIVE  PERIOD :  From  the  Origin  of  Society 
to  the  Destruction  of  Troy,  1184,  B.  C.  2.  SACRED  OR  MYSTIC  PERIOD:  Ending  with 
the  Dispersion  of  the  Pythagoreans,  500,  B.  C.  3.  PHILOSOPHIC  PERIOD  :  Ending  at 
the  Foundation  of  the  Alexandrian  Library,  320,  B.  C.  4.  ANATOMICAL  PERIOD : 
Ending  at  the  death  of  Galen,  A.  D.  200.  II.  AGE  OF  TRANSITION.  5.  GREEK  PE 
RIOD  :  Ending  at  the  Burning  of  the  Alexandrian  Library,  A.  D.  f)40.  6.  ARABIC  PE 
RIOD  :  Ending  at  the  Revival  of  Letters  in  Europe,  A.  D.  1400.  III.  AGE  OF  RENO 
VATION.  7.  ERUDITE  PERIOD :  Comprising  the  Fifteenth  and  Sixteenth  Centuries. 
8.  REFORM  PERIOD  :  Comprising  the  Seventeenth  and  Eighteenth  Centuries. 


From  Professor  JacJcton,  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania. 

PHILADELPHIA,  May  1. 

Iff/  Dear  Sir — The  work  you  have  translated,  "Histoire  de  la  Medeciue,"  by  Dr.  P.  V. 
Renouard,  is  a  compendious,  welf-arranged  treatise  on  the  subject. 

Every  physician  and  student  of  medicine  should  be  acquainted  with  the  history  of  his 
science.  It  is  not  only  interesting,  but  of  advantage  to  know  the  views  and  the  interpreta 
tions  of  the  same  pathological  conditions  investigatecKat  the  present  day,  in  the  past  ages. 
They  were  handled  then  with  as  much  force  and  skill  as  now,  but  without  the  scientific 
light  that  assists  so  powerfully  modern  research. 

Very  truly  yours,  SAMUEL  JACKSON. 


The  best  history  of  medicine  extant,  and  one  that  will  find  a  place  in  the  library  of  every 

physician  who  aims  at  an  acquaintance  with  the  past,  history  of  his  profession 

.     There  are  many  items  in  it  we  should  like  to  offer  for  the  instruction  and  amusement  of 
our  readers. — American  Journal  of  Pharmacy. 

From  the  pages  of  Dr.  Renouard,  a  very  accurate  acquaintance  may  be  obtained  with  th« 
history  of  medicine — its  relation  to  civilization,  its  progress  compared  with  other  science* 
and  arts,  its  more  distinguished  cultivators,  with  the  several  theories  and  systems  proposed 
by  them  ;  and  its  relationship  to  the  reigning  philosophical  dogmas  of  the  several  periods. 
His  historical  narrative  is  clear  and  concise — tracing  the  progress  of  medicine  through  ita 
three  ages  or  epochs — that  of  foundation  or  origin,  that  of  transition,  and  that  of  renova 
tion. — American  Journal  of  Medical  Science. 

It  is  a  work  of  profound  and  curious  research,  and  will  fill  a  place  in  our  English  literature 
which  has  heretofore  been  vacant.  It  presents  a  compact  view  of  the  progress  of  medicine  in  dif 
ferent  ages;  a  lucid  exposition  of  the  theories  of  rival  sects;  a  clear  delineation  of  the  changes 
of  different  systems  ;  together  with  the  bearings  of  the  whole  on  the  progress  of  civilization.  The 
work  also  abounds  in  amusing  and  instructive  incidents  relating  to  the  medial  profession. 
The  biographical  pictures  of  the  great  cultivators  of  the  science,  such  as  Hippocrates,  Galen, 
Avicenna,  Haller,  Harvey,  Jeuner,  and  others,  are  skillfully  drawn.  Dr.  Comegys  deserved 
the  thanks  of  not  only  the  members  of  the  medical  profession,  but  also  of  ene.ry  Artterican  scholar, 
for  the  fidelity  and  success  with  which  his  task  has  been  performed. — Harper's  Magazine. 


From  the  British  and  Foreign  Medico- Chirurgical  Review. 

History  of  Medicine. — It  is  expressly  from  the  conviction  of  the  deficJfcicy  of  the  English 
language  in  works  on  the  History  of  Medicine,  that  we  feel  indebted  To  Dr.  Comegys  for 
the  excellent  translation  of  the  comparatively  recent  work  of  Renouard,  the  title  cf  which 

ia  placed  at  the  head  of  this  article \Ve  hope  before  long  to  find  that  in 

every  important  school  of  medicine  in  this  country,  opportunities  will  be  offered  to  stu 
dents  whereby  they  may  be  enabled  to  attain  some  knowledge  at  least  of  the  history  ol 
that  profession  to  the  practice  of  which  their  lives  are  to  be  devoted. 


PUBLICATIONS  OF  MOOEE,  WILSTACH  &  BALDWIN. 


THE    AMERICAN     DISPENSATORY, 

151   JOHN  KI\<;,  M.   15., 

Profestor  of  Obstetric*,  and  Disease*  of  Women  and  Children,  in  the  "  Eclectic  Medical  Insti 
tute,  Cincinnati." 

ONE    VOLUME    ROYAL    OCTAVO,    1509    PAGES. 

THE  SIXTH  EDITION,  REVISED  AND  ENLARGED, 
JTCTST 


^ART  I  contains  an  account  of  a  large  number  of  medicinal  plants  indigenous  to  this  coun 
try,  many  of  which  were  for  the  first  time  presented  to  the  profession  iu  this  work,  giving 
their  botanical  descriptions,  general  chemical  histories,  therapeutical  properties  and  uses, 
together  with  a  large  amount  of  information  relative  thereto,  of  practical  value  to  the 
chemist,  pharmaceutist  and  physician. 

PART  II  contains  practical  pharmacy,  and  a  description  of  the  various  pharmaceutical 
compounds  in  use  among  Medical  Reformers,  especially  of  that  class  to  which  the  author 
belongs,  known  as  Eclectics.  The  various  chemical  and  pharmaceutical  processes  de 
scribed  are  mainly  those  of  recent  date,  and  such  as  have  been  found  by  ample  experience 
to  be  the  best ;  these  are  fully  and  clearly  explained,  so  that  every  apothecary  may  be  en 
abled  to  prepare,  without  difficulty,  all  or  any  of  the  more  modern  preparations  of  Re 
formers,  whenever  ordered. 

PART  III  is  devoted  to  the  various  mineral  medicines,  their  chemical  histories,  therapeuti 
cal  virtues  and  uses,  together  with  a  vocabulary  explaining  the  Latin  words  and  abbre 
viations  frequently  met  with  in  medical  prescriptions;  tables  of  doses;  weights  and 
measures ;  chemical  composition  of  mineral  waters ;  specific  gravities ;  hydrometrical 
equivalents;  solubility  of  salts,  acids,  bases,  etc.,  etc.,  all  of  which  are  of  much  utility 
and  indispensable  to  the  chemist  and  pharmaceutist.  The  work  contains  a  full  and  com 
plete  index,  so  arranged  that  any  medicine,  compound,  or  table,  etc.,  may  be  promptly 
found  without  any  delay  or  difficulty. 

Although  many  valuable  Dispensatories  have  been  presented  to  the  Physicians  and  Phar 
maceutists  of  this  country  and  Europe,  they  have  all,  excepting  the  former  editions  of  this 
Work,  been  confined  to  an  account  of  those  remedies  only  which  have  been  recognized  and 
employed  by  that  class  of  Physicians  termed  "  Old  School,"  or  "  Allopathic,"  and  have, 
therefore,  only  partially  answered  the  purposes  of  the  large  number  of  progressive  medical 
men  found  in  these  countries.  In  the  present  Dispensatory,  as  already  remarked,  not  only 
are  all  the  known  medicinal  plants  described,  as  well  as  their  numerous  pharmaceutical 
compounds,  but  likewise  all  those  poisonous  mineral  agents  so  strongly  objected  to  by  the 
New -School  Physicians — thus  forming  a  volume  full  nud  complete  in  itself.  There  is  no 
other  work  in  Europe  or  America  containing  such  completeness  of  information  n-garding 
the  history  of  therapeutical  virtues,  and  uses  of  indigenous  and  exotic  medicinal  plants,  nor 
which  so  fully  explains  the  various  processes  by  which  their  properties  are  extracted,  or 
their  compounds  prepared  ;  and,  indeed,  much  of  the  matter  presented  can  be  found  in  no 
•>ther  volume  extant.  To  render  the  work  practically  useful  to  the  Physician  and  Pharma 
ceutist,  and  to  bring  it  up  to  the  discoveries  and  improvements  in  medical  science  of  tb« 
present  day,  neither  pains  nor  expense  have  been  spared.  In  bringing  the  work  up  to  its 
present  standard  of  excellence,  the  author  has  had  the  efficient  aid  of  a  gentleman  well 
known  throughout  the  country  as  a  thoroughly  accomplished  Chemist  and  Pharmaceutist , 
one  who  is  daily  engaged  in  the  practical  pursuits  of  his  profession-. 

NOTICES  OF  FORMER  EDITIONS. 

GOOD  OLD-SCHOOL  AUTHORITY. — The  American  Journal  of  Pharmacy  speaks  of  the  work  aa 
follows  :  "  We  hav«  taken  some  pains  to  give  it  a  careful  examination,  although  pressed  for 
time.  .  .  .  The  numerous  plants  which  are  brought  forward  as  Eclectic  Reme 
dies,  embrace  many  of  undoubted  value.  .  .  .  The  work  embodies  a  large  num 
ber  of  facts  of  a  Therapeutical  character,  which  deserve  to  be  studied.  Many  of  these  are 
capable  of  being  adopted  by  physicians,  especially  by  country  physicians,  who  have  the  ad 
vantage  of  mors  easily  getting  th«  plants.  .  .  .  The  attention  which  ia  now 


PUBLICATIONS  OF  MOORE,  WILSTACH  &  BALDWIN, 


being  given  by  the  Eclectics,  in  classifying  and  arranging  facts  and  observations  relative  to 
American  plants,  will  certainly  be  attended  with  excellent  results. 

"  It  would  afford  us  much  pleasure  to  extract  a  number  of  articles  from  the  Eclectic  Dit- 
pfntatory,  but  the  length  of  this  article  admonishes  us  to  stop;  yet  we  can  not  close  without 
adjudging  to  Dr.  King  the  merit  of  giving  perspicuity  and  order  to  the  vast  mas-s  of  mate 
rial  collected  under  the  uame  of  Botanical  Medicine,  and  for  his  determination  to  oppose 
the  wholesale  quackery  of  Eclectic  Chemical  Institutes.  The  Eclectics  have  opened  a  wide 
field  for  the  rational  therapeutist,  and  the  organic  chemist ;  and  we  hope  that  physicians 
and  apothecaries  will  uot  be  repelled  from  reaping  the  harvest  which  will  accrue  to  obser 
vation  and  experiment." 

The  examination  we  have  been  able  to  give  it,  has  convinced  us  that  a  great  deal  of  labor 
has  been  bestowed  upon  the  production,  and  that  it  contains  an  account  of  a  larger  number 
of  the  medical  plants  indigenous  to  our  country,  than  *uy  other  work  with  which  we  ar< 
acquainted. — Michigan  Journal  of  Medicine. 

Lengthy  reports,  commendatory  of  the  work,  have  been  made,  and  numerous  Medical  Col 
leges  have  adopted  It  as  a  text-book.  Thousands  of  copies  have  been  eagerly  purchased  by 
parties  residing  in  nearly  or  quite  every  State  of  the  Union,  in  Canada  and  the  provinces, 
and,  indeed,  in  all  parts  of  the  world  where  the  English  language  is  spoken.  At  no  former 
time  has  the  demand  been  so  urgent,  or  the  orders  on  hand  half  BO  large  as  at  present. 

KING'S  AMERICAN  ECLECTIC  OBSTETRICS. 

By  JOHN  KING,  M.  D.     1  vol.  royal  8vo.,  sheep,  800  pages.  Price  $ 

We  have  carefully  examined  Dr.  King's  work,  and  can  honestly  recommend  it  as  a  safe 
and  judicious  guide  both  to  the  student  and  to  the  practitioner  of  midwifery.  In  the  treat 
ment  of  the  different  subjects  it  differs  but  little,  if  at  all,  from  the  standard  works  on  Ob 
stetrics  in  the  English  language,  except  that  the  employment  of  a  number  of  articles  of  the 
materia  medica,  not  much  in  vogue  among  regular  practitioners,  is  much  insisted  on  in  the 
medical  treatment  of  women  in  the  puerperal  state. — Bofton  Medical  and  Surgical  Journal 
(Old  School). 

We  consider  it  as  the  best  practical  work  on  Obstetrics  extant. — Middle  State*  Medical 
Reformer. 

Probably  no  man  has  done  more  than  Prof.  KING  to  elevate  the  literary  character  of  the 
particular  class  of  the  medical  profession  to  which  he  belongs.  In  this  age  of  light  and 
intelligence,  no  class  of  medical  men  can  sustain  themsetvcs,  and  commend  their  particular 
systems  to  an  intelligent  public,  without  giving  evidence  of  high  attainments  in  literature 
as  well  as  science.  Prof.  King,  if  he  stands  not  at  the  head,  is  certainly  not  surpassed  by 
any  of  his  colleagues.  His  work  on  Obstetrics  bears  evident  marks  of  the  same  master 
mind  shown  so  conspicuously  in  his  Dispensatory.  It  is  elaborate,  thorough  in  all  its  de 
tails,  and  so  far  as  we  have  been  able  to  examine,  fully  equal  to  the  works  of  any  other  claM 
of  physicians  on  that  subject. —  Worcester  Journal  of  Medicine. 


KING'S    (JOHN,   1H.    I*.     CHART    OF    URINARY    DE 
POSITS. 

EXTRACTS  FKOM  NOTICES. 

Table  oj  Urinary  Deposit*,  with  their  Microscopical  and  Chemical  Test*  for  Clinical  Exami 
nations.  By  John  King,  M.  D.,  Cincinnati.  This  is  a  very  valuable  chart,  giving,  at  a 
glance,  the  essential  facts  in  regard  to  the  various  forms  of  urinary  deposits,  their  chemical 
constituents,  mid  their  remedies.  There  are  thirteen  well-executed  drawings,  and  several 
tables.  This  chart  can  be  framed  and  hung  up  in  the  physician's  office,  and  thus  easily 
-eferred  to.  We  heartily  commend  it  to  the  attention  of  our  readers. — New  Jertey  JUedical 
Uepirter. 

The  result  of  much  labor  and  close  observation.  It  will  be  useful  for  reference,  and  par 
ticularly  valuable  to  the  Medical  student.  Dr.  King,  of  Cincinnati,  is  the  author,  and  de 
serves  much  credit  for  this  valuable  contribution  to  Medical  Science. — Iowa  Medical 
Journal. 

Table  of  Urinary  Deposits,  etc.  This  is  a  valuable  aid  to  any  one  who  makes  exam 
inations  of  urinary  deposits,  containing  thirteen  figures  of  these  deposits,  aa  they  appear 
uiuler  the  microscope. — New  Hampshire  Journal  of  Medicine. 

A  very  useful  and  valuable  chart.  We  congratulate  Dr.  King  on  the  manner  in  which  ho 
ha«  condensed  this  difficult  but  important  subject,  BO  as  to  present  a  bird's-eye  and  cl«*r 
ri«w  of  the  matter,  in  tho  form  of  *  chart. — Philadelphia  Medical  and  Surgical  Journal. 


PUBLICATIONS  OF  MOOEE,  WILSTAOH  &  BALDWIN, 

Carefully  arranged,  and  will  prove  useful  as  a  reference  to  the  practitioner,  to  refresh  hi* 
memory,  ami  materially  aid  the  student  in  getting  a  clear  idea  of  the  subject. — American 
Journal  of  Pharmacy,  Philadelphia. 

Will  b«  sent  by  mail  (foU-paid)  for  Firry  CKXTS,  or  may  be  had  through  booksellers. 


AMERICAN  ECLECTIC  PRACTICE  OF  MEDICINE. 

Uy  I.  G.  JONES,  M.  D.  Late  Professor  of  Theory  and  Practice  of  Medicine,  in  the  Eclee 
tic  Medical  Institute,  Cincinnati.  New  edition  ;  extended  and  revised,  at  request  of  the 
author,  by  WM.  SHERWOOD,  M.  D.,  Professor  of  Medical  Practice  and  Pathology,  in  the 
Eclectic  College  of  Medicine,  Cincinnati.  Complete  in  two  volumes,  octavo,  1,GOO  pagos. 
Price  8 

EXTRACTS  FROM  NOTICES. 

The  views  maintained  by  the  authors  are  stated  with  clearness  and  precision  ;  the  style  w 
flowing  and  lively,  and  the  whole  book  is  remarkably  free  from  the  verbiage  which  is  suoh 
M  general  feature  of  medical  treatises. — N.  Y.  Tribune. 

It  was  the  earnest  advice  of  Dr.  Rush  to  his  students,  to  thoroughly  investigate  the  indig 
enous  medicines  of  this  country  ;  and  one  great  merit  of  this  work  is  that  it  contains  de- 
Bcriptions  of  many  recent  remedial  agents  that  are  not  embodied  in  any  other  work  on 
practice.  It  is  ably  and  lucidly  written,  aud  will  highly  interest  and  instruct  all  who  read 
it. — Galena  Journal. 

Coming  from  the  source  it  does,  and  with  the  able  revisions  and  important  addition* 
which  it  has  received,  this  edition  of  the  work  can  not  fail  to  be  regarded  as  a  complete 
and  reliable  text-book, of  practical  medicine,  suited  to  the  wants  and  convenience  of  such 
students  and  practitioners  as  would  desire  to  gain  the  most  useful  and  important  informa 
tion  which  the  profession  possesses  at  the  preset  day,  together  with  a  correct  knowledge 
ol  the  remedies  and  treatment,  in  the  most  desirable  form,  peculiar  to  what  is  known  ai 
the  Eclectic  System  of  Medicine.  It  is  not  a  book  of  recipes,  adapted  to  routine  practice, 
but  it  is  filled  with  practical  directions  and  suggestions,  intended  for  the  intelligent  prac- 
tiiioner,  accompanied  by  rational  explanations  of  and  reasons  for  every  procedure  recom 
mended  !•»  the  treatment  of  diseases  ;  aud  every  important  paragraph  in  the  work  is  ren 
dered  at  once  accessible  by  means  of  a  complete  table  of  contents,  and  a  very  copioui 
index.  The  spirit  of  the  work  is  liberal  and  eclectic  in  the  true  sense  of  those  terms,  10 
that  no  medical  man,  of  any  bchool,  can  take  offense  at  its  contents;  while  nil,  it  is  be 
lieved,  will  derive  much  practical  advantage  from  a  careful  perusal  of  its  pages. —  W«*bm 
Ohrittian  Advocate. 

We  have  received  from  the  publishers  a  copy  of  the  above  work,  and  after  giving  it  such 
N  cursory  examination  as  the  pressure  of  other  engagements  would  permit,  are  prepared  to 
way  that  for  Eclectics  it  is,  perhaps,  the  best  work  published.  The  language  is  clear,  and 
generally  forcible,  and  being  in  the  form  of  lectures  to  his  class,  it  has  the  merit  of  free- 
iloin  und  liveliness  of  style,  so  necessary  in  such  works  to  keep  up  tlio  Interest  of  the 
reader.  .  .  In  regard  to  the  practical  part,  it  is  due  to  the  varied  research  of  th«» 
authors  to  say,  that  it  contains  many  excellent  suggestions,  as  well  as  prescriptions. — 
Houthern  Medical  Reformer. 

Four  years  ago,  at  the  earnest  request  o!  his  former  colleagues  and  friends,  the  late  Prof. 
I.  0.  Jones  had  published  the  work  of  which  vre  are  now  presented  with  a  revised  and  e»- 
t«nded  edition  ;  and  since  then  his  practice  has  been  received  by  .the  liberal  portion  of  the 
profession,  throughout  the  country,  as  the  practice,  and  far  superior  to  all  others. 

But  as  a  new  edition  was  called  for,  it  has  been  very  carefully  revised  at  the  request  of 
the  author,  now  deceased,  by  his  former  associate,  and  is  presented  to  the  profesnion  with 
many  additions,  corrections  of  errors  and  oversights. 

The  various  additions,  and  Notet  on  Treatment,  as  well  as  the  new  articles  by  the  present 
editor,  have  been  BO  arranged  as  to  preserve  the  former  scope  and  design  of  the  work  ;  and 
while  it  is  rendered  more  perfect  and  complete,  the  original  arrangement  of  the  author  it 
not  interfered  with.  The  mechanical  execution  of  the  book  i»  admirable  —  Colltgt  Journal. 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 
Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


Mfli/      i  «•*"*    ">  ^-« 

•"•••*•**•'•"" 

'". 

or; 

E      -          i 

3  LD 

5  -2PM 

r*if* 

I?     r-i 

67  -9PM 

DEPT 

1967  ^  / 

UQAN  Dfc~PT0 
DCf*rr\   i  n       iJAD  1  ' 

Ktu  U  LD     "Alt  1  v 
OCT 

5  71  -11  AM  111 

RPR  2  2  jqyt  ?  % 

/       REC'D  LD     APR 

15/1-2PM 

ifcTER-LIBR; 

^°  'SENT  ON  ILL 

o         1O7( 

SI  A  M    0    O     -fOOC 

IViAK  7      ran 

JAN  ^  3  13^5 

JAN       r  ' 

U.  C.  BERKELEY 

SENT  ON  ILL 

RECEIVED 

FEB  1  5  1994 

FEB  2  3  1995 

U.  C.  BERKELEY 

:iRCULATION  DEPT 

AUG  0  3  2005 

jD  21-1 
T  r»  01  A    fin™  o  TT                                      General  Library 
University  of  California 
Berkeley 

U.C.BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


CDMES4D3S3 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


